Back
BIBEK CHAUDHURI
Md. Nadim @ Sheikh – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
Bibek Chaudhuri, J. – The instant criminal revision is directed against the order, dated 19th of July 2022, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 1st Court-cum-Special Judge, Children's Court, at Sitamarhi, in connection with Criminal Appeal No. 13 of 2022, filed by the Opposite Party No. 2 herein, whereby and whereunder, the learned Appellate Court quashed and set aside the order, dated 18th of February 2022, passed by the learned Juvenile Justice Board (hereinafter referred to as the ‘JJB’) Sitamarhi in G.R. Case No. 3102 of 2019, arising out of Parihar P.S. Case No. 167 of 2019. The JJB declared the Petitioner to be a Child in Conflict with Law.
2. On the basis of a written complaint submitted by the Opposite Party No. 2, police registered Parihar P.S. Case No. 167 of 2019 against altogether 18 persons, including the Petitioner, alleging, inter alia, that the accrued persons surrounded his brothers, namely, Md. Akram and Md. Arman and assaulted both of them with the help of lathi, gadasha, knife, sword, iron rod, etc., as a result of which, one of the brothers of the de facto complainant, namely, Md. Akram died.
3. In the FIR, the Opposite Party No. 2 purposefully recor
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the determination of a person's age, especially in cases involving the Juvenile Justice Act and the POCSO Act, should be based on credible and....
(1) Claim of juvenility may be raised at any stage of a criminal proceeding, even after final disposal of case – Delay in raising claim of juvenility cannot be a ground for rejection of such claim – ....
The court determined that documents indicating age must be prioritized as per Juvenile Justice Act, with the accused confirmed as a juvenile based on familial ages and educational certificates.
The court can rely on evidence, including radiological tests, to determine a person's age and may reject a claim of juvenility based on contradictory claims and evidence.
The court ruled that age determination for juveniles must consider all available evidence, allowing a margin of error in ossification tests, ultimately declaring the petitioner juvenile.
The court's decision was influenced by the evidence from the Parivar Register and medical examination, which led to the rejection of the revisionist's claim of juvenility.
Educational certificates must be prioritized over medical evaluations in age determination cases under the Juvenile Justice Act.
Point of Law : Scope Of Revisional Jurisdiction -.CR.P.C makes provision for the High Court to exercise its Revisional Jurisdiction in furtherance of any proceeding before any inferior Criminal Court....
The court emphasized that age determination in juvenile cases must primarily rely on credible documentation like birth certificates and school records, with ossification tests being a last resort in ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
