ORDER

Harbana Lal, J. - This Criminal Misc, Petition u/s. 482 Cr. P.C. by accused petitioner Om Prakash seeks directions for holding inquiry as to the determination of his age.

2. Petitioner Om Prakash is facing trial in Criminal Case No. 95/ 2000 along With others before the court of learned Civil Judge (Jr. Div.) cum Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Reengus on charges for the offences u/

ss. 323, 325 and 448 I.P.C in respect of alleged occurrence that took place on 18-1-2000. It is alleged that he was born on 1-7-1984 and thus his age was 15 years and 6 months only on the date of occurrence.

3. This Case came to be instituted after the enforcement of the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 (here-in-after referred to as .the Act') vide notification No. GSR 710(E) dated 13-8-1987 w.e.f. 2-10- 1987. This case was, therefore, governed by the provisions of the Act and not by the provisions of the Rajasthan Children Act, 1970. Section 26 of the Act has no application to the instant case.

4. As per Section 2(h) of the Act 'juvenile' means a boy who has not attained the age of sixteen years or a girl who has not attained the age of eighteen years. A certificate of the Head Master, Government Higher Secondary School, Reengus issued on 27-8-2003 was filed in the court, below as well as in this court to show that his date of birth is 1.7.1984.

5. Section 2 (d) defines 'competent authority' as under:

'Competent authority' means, in relation to neglected Juveniles, a Board, and, in relation to delinquent Juveniles, a Juvenile court and where no such Board or Juvenile Court has been constituted, includes any Court empowered under sub section (2) of Section 7 to exercise the powers conferred on a Board or Juvenile Court.

6. Section 8 provides the procedure to be adopted where the Magistrate is not competent under the aforesaid Act to exercise powers of the Board or Juvenile Justice Court. Section 24 prohibits trial of a Juvenile With other accused person who is not a Juvenile.

7. Section 32 which deals with presumption and determination of age of the accused brought before the competent authority is as under: "32. Presumption and determination of age:- (I) Where it appears to

a competent authority that a person brought before it under any of the provisions of this Act (otherwise than for the purpose of giving evidence) is a juvenile the competent authority shall make due inquiry as to the age of that person and for that purpose shall take such evidence as may be necessary and shall record a finding whether the person is a juvenile or not stating his age as nearly as may be.

(2) No order of a competent authority shall be deemed to have become invalid merely by any subsequent proof that the person in respect of whom the order has been made is not a juvenile and the age recorded by the competent authority to be the age of the person so brought before it shall for the purposes of this Act be deemed to be the true age of that person. "

8. From a perusal of the aforesaid Section it is evident that where it appears to the competent authority that a person who has been brought before it under any provision of this Act (otherwise than for the purpose of giving evidence) is a Juvenile it shall make due inquiry as to the age of that person and for that purpose shall take such evidence as may be necessary and then record a finding whether the person is juvenile or not stating his age as nearly as possible.

9. It is an admitted fact that in the instant case no such inquiry has been made. The application filed by and on behalf of the petitioner before the learned court below is still pending. As per the certificate placed on record, his age is prima facie below 16 years on the date of occurrence. His trial is being proceeded along with others who are not juvenile. It is, therefore essential for securing the ends of justice to issue appropriate directions to the competent authority to make inquiry with regard to the age of the petitioner as per the provisions o