IMPORTANT POINT
1. Entry relating to date of birth entered in the mark sheet is one of the valid proof of evidence for determination of age of an accused person. The School Leaving Certificate is also a valid proof in determining the age of the accused person.

Headnote:Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000- Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007-Rule-12-Rule-12- Registration of FIR under Sections 302 and 307 of IPC against appellant and three others -Application by appellant’ mother stating that appellant was a minor at the time of alleged occurrence-Issue in consideration whether appellant was a juvenile at the time of alleged occurrence-Evidence on record that appellant had produced mark sheet of High School examination issued by school authority-Perusal of said certificate showed reference to appellant’s Roll No., his name, Date of Birth, name of the school, details regarding various subjects, maximum marks, marks obtained and ultimate result in the examination- Another document relied on by appellant was School Leaving Certificate - Documents furnished clearly showed that date of birth of appellant had been noted as 18.06.1989- Even though Board had correctly accepted entry relating to date of birth in the mark sheet and school certificate, Sessions Judge and High Court committed a grave error in determining age of the appellant ignoring the date of birth mentioned in those documents which was illegal, erroneous and contrary to Rules- Further, the date of birth mentioned in High School mark sheet produced by appellant had duly been corroborated by School Leaving Certificate of appellant of Class X - Apart from the clerk and Principal of the school, mother of appellant categorically stated on oath that appellant was born on 18.06.1989 –Hence held that appellant was a juvenile on the date of occurrence -Impugned order of High Court set aside-Appeal allowed. (Paras 17 to 22)
       Facts of the Case :
        An FIR was registered under Sections 302 and 307 of IPC against appellant and three others herein in the instant case. An Application was filed by appellant’ mother stating that appellant was a minor at the time of alleged occurrence. Issue in consideration in present appeal was whether appellant was a juvenile at the time of alleged occurrence.
       Findings of the Court :
        Evidence on record that appellant had produced mark sheet of High School examination issued by school authority. Perusal of said certificate showed reference to appellant’s Roll No., his name, Date of Birth, name of the school, details regarding various subjects, maximum marks, marks obtained and ultimate result in the examination. Another document relied on by appellant was School Leaving Certificate . Documents furnished clearly showed that date of birth of appellant had been noted as 18.06.1989. Even though Board had correctly accepted entry relating to date of birth in the mark sheet and school certificate, Sessions Judge and High Court committed a grave error in determining age of the appellant ignoring the date of birth mentioned in those documents which was illegal, erroneous and contrary to Rules. Entry relating to date of birth entered in the mark sheet is one of the valid proof of evidence for determination of age of an accused person. The School Leaving Certificate is also a valid proof in determining the age of the accused person. Further, the date of birth mentioned in High School mark sheet produced by appellant had duly been corroborated by School Leaving Certificate of appellant of Class X . Apart from the clerk and Principal of the school, mother of appellant categorically stated on oath that appellant was born on 18.06.1989 .Hence held that appellant was a juvenile on the date of occurrence .Impugned order of High Court was set aside. Appeal was allowed

JUDGMENT

P. Sathasivam, J. —

1) Leave granted.

2) This appeal is directed against the final judgment and order dated 10.12.2010 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Criminal Revision No. 716 of 2009 whereby the High Court dismissed the criminal revision filed by the appellant herein.

3) Brief facts:

(a) The appellant claims to have born on 18.06.1989 in Village and Post Dadheru Kala, Police Station Charthawal, District Muzaffarnagar, U.P. He was admitted in Class I in Nehru Preparatory School, Khurd, Muzaffarnagar on 05.07.1994 and studied there till 20.05.1998. Thereafter, on 04.07.1998, he got admission in Class VI in the National High School Dadheru, Khurd-O-Kalan, Muzaffarnagar and studied there till Class X. The date of birth in the mark sheet is mentioned as 18.06.1989.

(b) On 04.06.2007, a First Information Report (in short “the FIR”) was lodged by Khatizan, wife of Nawab-the deceased, against the appellant herein and three others for the alleged occurrence which culminated into Crime Case No. 215 of 2007 at Police Station Charthawal, District Muzaffarnagar, U.P. under Sections 302 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short “the IPC”).

(c) On 12.06.2007, the mother of the appellant submitted an application before the Juvenile Justice Board (in short “the Board”), Muzaffarnagar, U.P. stating that the appellant was a minor at the time of the alleged occurrence. After examining the witnesses, the Board, vide judgment and order dated 24.01.2008, declared the appellant juvenile under the provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”).

(d) Against the judgment of the Board, Khatizan - the wife of the deceased filed Criminal Appeal No. 11 of 2008 before the Additional Sessions Judge, Muzaffarnagar, U.P. under Section 52 of the Act. The State - respondent No.1 did not file any appeal. Vide judgment dated 13.01.2009, the Additional Sessions Judge allowed the appeal and set aside the order dated 24.01.2008 passed by the Board.

(e) Challenging the judgment dated 13.01.2009 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, the appellant filed Criminal Revision No. 716 of 2009 before the High Court of Allahabad. The High Court, by the impugned judgment dated 10.12.2010, dismissed the criminal revision. Hence this appeal by way of special leave.

4) Heard Mr. Dinesh Kumar Garg, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. R.K. Gupta, learned counsel for the State.

Despite notice, no one has entered appearance on behalf of respondent No.2.

5) Before considering the merits of the claim of the appellant and the stand of the State, let us consider Rule 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules’) which reads as under:-

“12. Procedure to be followed in determination of Age. (1) In every case concerning a child or a juvenile in conflict with law, the court or the Board or as the case may be the Committee referred to in rule 19 of these rules shall determine the age of such juvenile or child or a juvenile in conflict with law within a period of thirty days from the date of making of the application for that purpose.

(2) The court or the Board or as the case may be the Committee shall decide the juvenility or otherwise of the juvenile or the child or as the case may be the juvenile in conflict with law, prima facie on the basis of physical appearance or documents, if available, and send him to the observation home or in jail.

(3) In every case concerning a child or juvenile in conflict with law, the age determination inquiry shall be conducted by the court or the Board or, as the case may be, the Committee by seeking evidence by obtaining -

(a) (i) the matriculation or equivalent certificates, if available; and in the absence whereof;

(ii) the date of birth certificate from the school (other than a play school) first attended; and in the absence whereof;

(iii) the birth certificate given by a cor

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2011 Supreme(SC) 736

2011 (5) Supreme 476SUPREME COURT OF INDIAP. Sathasivam and Dr. B.S. Chauhan, JJ.Shah Nawaz — Appellant(s)versusState of U.P. & Anr. — Respondent(s)Criminal Appeal No. 1531 of 2011(Arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No.3361 of 2011)Decided on : 5-8-2011

IMPORTANT POINT 1. Entry relating to date of birth entered in the mark sheet is one of the valid proof of evidence for determination of age of an accused person. The School Leaving Certificate is also a valid proof in determining the age of the accused person.

Related Judgments

Plastikos Packaging VS Commissioner of Central Excise, Allahabad

SYSTEMS MANUFACTURING LTD VS SYSTEMS EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION - 2000 Supreme(Kar) 665

JOGENDRA SINGH VS SURESH MANJULAPUR - 2000 Supreme(Kar) 662

MYSORE WINE PRODUCTS AND ALLIED CO. LTD. , BANGALORE VS PRESIDING OFFICER, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE - 2000 Supreme(Kar) 663

Bose VS State, rep. by Inspector of Police, Salaikiramam P. S. , - 2000 Supreme(Mad) 1273

Jain Construction Company VS State of Rajasthan - 2000 Supreme(Raj) 912

Voltas Limited VS Joint Collector, Medak - 2000 Supreme(AP) 945

STATE OF BIHAR VS SURENDRA SINGH RAUTELA ALIAS BENGALI - 2000 Supreme(Jhk) 45

Krishna Kumar VS Gulab Khan - 2000 Supreme(Raj) 1546

KARSANBHAI DAHYABHAI PARMAR VS DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE - 2000 Supreme(Guj) 1009

2011 (5) Supreme 476
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
P. Sathasivam and Dr. B.S. Chauhan, JJ.
Shah Nawaz — Appellant(s)
versus
State of U.P. & Anr. — Respondent(s)
Criminal Appeal No. 1531 of 2011
(Arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No.3361 of 2011)
Decided on : 5-8-2011

IMPORTANT POINT
1. Entry relating to date of birth entered in the mark sheet is one of the valid proof of evidence for determination of age of an accused person. The School Leaving Certificate is also a valid proof in determining the age of the accused person.