K. S. JHA VERI, J. The present appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 19th July, 1993 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. VIII, Ahmedabad, in Sessions Case No. 384 of 1991 for the alleged commission of offences punishable under Sec. 302 of I.P.C. and convicted the appellant to undergo imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 500, in default, to undergo imprisonment for two months.

2. The prosecution case, in short, is as under :

2.1 The appellant-accused, along with his parents and sister who was studying in XIIth standard, was residing in Garden View Flats near Parimal Garden, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad. Father of victim had three daughters and one son, out of which eldest daughter was married, while his other two younger daughters expired. The victim was studying in XII standard.

2.2 On 30th August, 1991 Police Sub-Inspector Gohil received a telephonic message from first informant P. W. 1 stating that a person who is residing in Garden View Flat has committed murder of a girl in the neighborhood and injured himself by knife blows. He has also told Inspector Gohil that the parents of accused would come to the Police Station. Accordingly, on their reaching at the Police Station Shri Gohi! went to the flat in question where he found dead body of the victim in the bathroom and the appellant was in bleeding condition.

2.3 The accused was found sitting on a cot in the next room. P.S.I. Gohil recorded the complaint against the accused and called father of the victim, and thereafter, made inquest panchnama and also the panchnama of scene of offence in the presence of panchas and blood-stained knife and other articles were seized under a panchnama. He has also found milk bags in the kitchen and steel dolclla (milkpan) bearing the name of father of victim. P.SJ. Gohil then recorded statements of certain witnesses and accused who was injured was sent to V. S. Hospital.

2.4 The dead body of victim was also sent for post mortem to the V. S. Hospital and post mortem note was also obtained. Muddamal knife, etc. which were attached were sent to Forensic Science Laboratory and report of Forensic Science Laboratory was obtained. Map of the scene of offence was also obtained which was prepared by Circle Inspector, Ahmedabad. After completing necessary investigation, charge-sheet was submitted in the Court of learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad, on 25-11-1991. As the offence was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad committed the case to the Court of Sessions on 30th November, 1991. The case was numbered as Sessions Case No. 384 of 1991.

3. Learned Advocate for the appellant had filed an application at Exh. 5 to the effect that the accused is below 16 years of age, and therefore, the said Court has no jurisdiction to try the said case. The matter was therefore, kept for inquiry. After inquiry, learned Additional City Sessions Judge, Court No. 21, Ahmedabad passed order on 31st December 1992 below application Exh. 5. The operative part of the order reads as under :

"10. It was held in the case of Umeshchandra v. State of Rajasthan. reported in 1982 (2) SCC 202 that entries in the school register and admission form regarding the date of birth constitute good proof of age. In the said case, various aspects regarding determination of birth date are mentioned, and therefore, in this case, birth dated 18-12-1974 of accused Gaurav entered first in the school and which still continues has to be accepted as his correct birth date. It is not proved from any evidence that his correct birth date is 21-2-1976 and on the date of incident, i.e. On 30-8-1991, he was below the age of 16 years.

Under the above circumstances, I hold that on the date of incident, i.e. on 30-8-1991 accused Gaurav was not below the age of 16 years and he was aged about 16 years, 8 months and 12 days on the said day. Therefore, City Sessions Court at Ahmedabad has