BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J.

( 1 ) THE learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this Revision petition has been filed inasmuch as the petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 26. 5. 2005 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board dismissing the petitioner's application of 12. 5. 2005 requesting for holding a full fledged inquiry with regard to the age of the accused Hasan Ali in accordance with the provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, (hereinafter referred to as the said Act.)

( 2 ) THE facts leading to the filing of the present revision petition are that prior to the committal of the case by the Metropolitan Magistrate to the Sessions Court, on 13. 2. 2004 the Metropolitan Magistrate recorded the age of accused Hasan Ali as given by him to be 17 years. However, the learned Metropolitan Magistrate observed that from his appearance he did not appear less than 18 years of age. It was noted in the said order that the accused had stated that he did not go to school nor did he have any document to prove his age. At that stage, the learned Metropolitan Magistrate noted that he was satisfied that the accused was above 18 years of age. The case was committed to the Court of the Sessions Judge, Delhi by the same order dated 13. 2. 2004 Thereafter, some proceedings took place with regard to the age of the accused Hasan Ali before the Sessions Court. The accused Hasan Ali had moved an application before the Additional Sessions Judge seeking an order for conducting the ossification test so as to determine his correct age inasmuch as the accused claimed to be 15 years old whereas the police challan showed him as 21 years old. Apparently an ossification test was directed and the radiological examination, as recorded in the order dated 13. 10. 2004 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, revealed that the age of the accused was between 16 to 18 years. However, in the order dated 13. 10. 2004 the learned Additional Sessions Judge relied on the report submitted by Inspector V. S. Ahlawat which in turn was based on the date of birth of the accused having been confirmed as 5. 1. 1988 from the hospital records. The learned Additional Sessions Judge concluded that the age of Hasan Ali was 16 years 25 days on the date of presentation of the challan, i. e. , on 30. 1. 2004 and, accordingly, held that the accused was a juvenile and directed that he be produced before the Juvenile Justice Board. The exact words used by the learned Additional Sessions Judge while making the aforesaid order are, inter alia, as follows:-"further report has been filed by SHO with respect to verification of date of birth certificate of accused Hassan Ali S/o Nurul Islam. It is submitted by Inspector B. S. Ahlawat that as per report, the date of birth of accused has been confirmed as 5. 1. 88 from hospital record. It is clarified that earlier the same could not be confirmed as the photocopy of the date of birth certificate was not legible. Ld APP also submits that as per Radiological Examination on 5. 6. 04, the age of the accused has been opined to be between 16-18 years. In view of the report submitted by the prosecution, the accused Hassan Ali was aged about 16 years and 25 days on the date of presentation of challan i. e. 30. 1. 04. The accused is accordingly a juvenile and required to be produced before Juvenile Justice Board. "

( 3 ) BY virtue of the said order dated 13. 10. 2004 the accused Hasan Ali was remanded to the observation home and a direction was passed for filing a separate charge sheet against the accused Hasan Ali before the Juvenile Justice Board. On 12. 5. 2005 the complainant moved an application before the Juvenile Justice Board praying for a full fledged inquiry into the age of accused Hasan Ali in accordance with the provisions of the said Act. This application was taken up for disposal and was dismissed by the Juvenile Justice Board by virtue of the impugned order dated 26. 5. 2005. The reasons for