IMPORTANT POINT
Juvenility – Headmaster/Principal of a State Government-recognized school cannot be said to be a ‘public servant’ for the purposes of Evidence Act.

JUDGMENT :

AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH, J.

The present appeal emanates from the Final Judgment and Order passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as the ‘High Court’) in Criminal Revision No.2144/2015 dated 29.03.2016 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Impugned Order’) [2016:AHC:50543], whereby the High Court dismissed the criminal revision petition filed by the Appellant and upheld the Order passed by the Court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.1, Kairana, Muzaffarnagar (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Trial Court’) on 19.05.2015, declaring Respondent No.2 as a ‘juvenile’ under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Juvenile Justice Act’) [as it then was].

BRIEF FACTS:

2. The Appellant alleges that, on 31.08.2011, while the Appellant, his father, mother and his brother/Rajesh Singh (hereinafter referred to as ‘Rajesh’) had gone to their fields, his chacha (paternal uncle)/Lillu Singh and his son Devi Singh/Respondent No.2 forcibly entered his house at around 10 am. When restrained by his wife who was alone at the house, the Appellant alleges that the two persons – father and son i.e., Lillu Singh and Respondent No.2 – manhandled her. When the said incident was narrated to the Appellant and his brother by the Appellant’s parents who had reached the house during the incident, Rajesh went to the accused/father-son duo, to enquire about the same. In this interaction, it is alleged that his chacha and Respondent No.2 forcibly took Rajesh inside their house, where the chacha caught/held him, and Respondent No.2 took out a country-made pistol and fired it on Rajesh with the intention to kill him. It is stated that pursuant to this, Rajesh suffered injuries and died en route to Kairana hospital.

3. Thereafter, the Appellant lodged a First Information Report being Crime Case No.385/2011 at Kairana Police Station, Muzaffarnagar against Lillu Singh and Respondent No.2 under Sections 452¹[‘452. House-trespass after preparation for hurt, assault or wrongful restraint.—Whoever commits house- trespass, having made preparation for causing hurt to any person or for assaulting any person, or for wrongfully restraining any person, or for putting any person in fear of hurt, or of assault, or of wrongful restraint, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.’] and 302²[‘302. Punishment for murder.—Whoever commits murder shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine.’] of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘IPC’).

4. This complaint proceeded to be converted into Sessions Trial No.123/2012 before the Court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kairana, Muzaffarnagar. With a plea that his date of birth was 18.04.1995, and as on the date of the incident, he was aged 16 years, 4 months and 13 days, Respondent No.2 filed a miscellaneous application numbered as Miscellaneous Case No.04/11/2015 before the Trial Court seeking to establish his juvenility, which was connected with Sessions Trial No.123/2012. The Trial Court, on appreciating the evidence and material placed on record, vide Order dated 19.05.2015, confirmed that as on the date of the incident, the Respondent No.2 was 16 years, 4 months and 13 days old and thereby established his juvenility.

5. Aggrieved by the Order of the Trial Court, the Appellant preferred a criminal revision petition before the High Court, which was dismissed vide the Impugned Order. Consequently, the juvenility of the Respondent No. 2 stood confirmed by the High Court.

THE APPELLANT’S SUBMISSIONS:

6. The Appellant’s submissions majorly revolved around pointing out how the Courts below erred in establishing and confirming the Respondent No.2’s juvenility based on a transfer certificate issued by the first school attended by Respondent No.2, i.e., Kaushik Modern Publi