ORDER

In an inquiry conducted under Section 32 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986, (hereinafter referred to as the 1986 Act ) the Trial Court recorded a finding to the effect that petitioner Arnit Das was not a juvenile on the date of occurrence. This finding was upheld by the learned Sessions Judge in an appeal filed by petitionor-Arnit Das. The High Court also dismissed revision petition filed by the petitioner against that finding. Order of the High Court was put in issue by the petition in SLP (Crl.) 729/2000. In an appeal (Criminal Appeal No. 469/2000) arising out of that special leave petition [since reported as Arnit Das v. State of Bihar1], dealing with that issue, it was observed:

"24. So far as the finding regarding the age of the appellant is concerned it is based on appreciation of evidence and arrived at after taking into consideration the material available on record and valid reasons having been assigned for it. The finding arrived at by the learned ACJM has been maintained by the Sessions Court in appeal and the High Court in revision. We find no case having been made out for interfering therewith."

2. Thus, this Court also affirmed the concurrent findings regarding