[Citation : 2012(2) RLW 1103 (SC)]
(Supreme Court)
Shah Nawaz Vs. State of U.P. & Anr. (Sathasivam, J.)
HON'BLE P. SATHASIVAM, J.
HON'BLE DR. B.S. CHAUHAN, J.
Shah Nawaz
Versus
State of U.P. & Anr.
Criminal Appeal No. 1531 of 2011, decided on 05.08.2011
Appeal allowed. (Paras 19 & 20)
fd'kksj U;k; ¼cky lqj{kk ,oa laj{k.k½ vf/kfu;e] 2000] /kkjk 7 rFkk fd'kksj U;k; ¼cky lqj{kk ,oa laj{k.k½ fu;e] 2007 fu;e 12 lifBr lk{; vf/kfu;e] 1872] /kkjk 45 & fd'kksj dh vk;q dk vo/kkj.k & fu;e 12 ;g fopkj djrk gS fd esfMdy cksMZ ls esfMdy jk; dsoy rHkh ysuh pkfg;s tc esfVªdqys'ku lfVZfQdsV] ;k Ldwy lfVZfQdsV ;k fdlh fuxe ;k iapk;r ;k uxj ikfydk }kjk tkjh dksbZ tUe izek.k i= miyC/k ugha gks & vfHkfu/kkZfjr & vadrkfydk vkSj Ldwy lfVZfQdsV esa mYysf[kr tUefrfFk dh dsoy esfMdy cksMZ dh esfMdy jk; ds vk/kkj ij mis{kk djuk mfpr ughaA vihy Lohdkj dhA ¼in la[;k 19 o 20½
2. This appeal is directed against the final judgment and order dated 10.12.2010 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Criminal Revision No. 716 of 2009 whereby the High Court dismissed the criminal revision filed by the appellant herein.
3. Brief facts:
(a) The appellant claims to have born on 18.06.1989 in Village and Post Dadheru Kala, Police Station Charthawal, District Muzaffarnagar, U.P. He was admitted in Class I in Nehru Preparatory School, Khurd, Muzaffarnagar on 05.07.1994 and studied there till 20.05.1998. Thereafter, on 04.07.1998, he got admission in Class VI in the National High School Dadheru, Khurd-O-Kalan, Muzaffarnagar and studied there till Class X. The date of birth in the mark sheet is mentioned as 18.06.1989.
(b) On 04.06.2007, a First Information Report (in short "the FIR") was lodged by Khatizan, wife of Nawab-the deceased, against the appellant herein and three others for the alleged occurrence which culminated into Crime Case No. 215 of 2007 at Police Station Charthawal, District Muzaffarnagar, U.P. under Sections 302 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short "the IPC").
(c) On 12.06.2007, the mother of the appellant submitted an application before the Juvenile Justice Board (in short "the Board"), Muzaffarnagar, U.P. stating that the appellant was a minor at the time of the alleged occurrence. After examining the witnesses, the Board, vide judgment and order dated 24.01.2008, declared the appellant juvenile under the provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act").
(d) Against the judgment of the Board, Khatizan - the wife of the deceased filed Criminal Appeal No. 11 of 2008 before the Additional Sessions Judge, Muzaffarnagar, U.P. under Section 52 of the Act. The State – respondent No.1 did not file any appeal. Vide judgment dated 13.01.2009, the Additional Sessions Judge allowed the appeal and set aside the order dated 24.01.2008 passed by the Board.
(e) Challenging the judgment dated 13.01.2009 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, the appellant filed Criminal Revision No. 716 of 2009 before the High Court of Allahabad. The High Court, by the impugned judgment dated 10.12.2010, dismissed the criminal revision. Hence this appeal by way of special leave.
4. Heard Mr. Dinesh Kumar Garg, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. R.K. Gupta, learned counsel for the State. Despite notice, no one has entered appearance on behalf of respondent No.2.
5. Before considering the merits of the claim of the appellant and the stand of the State, let us consider Rule 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules') which reads as under:-
"12. Procedure to be followed in determination of Age.? (1) In every case concerning a child or a juvenile in conflict with law, the court or the Board or as the case may be the Committee referred to in rule 19 of these rules shall determine the age of such juvenile or child or a juvenile in conflict with law within a period of thirty days from the date of making of the application for that purpose.
(2) The court or the Board or as the case may be the Committee shall decide the juvenility or otherwise of the juvenile or the child or as the case may be the juvenile in conflict with law, prima facie on the basis of physical appearance or documents, if available, and send him to the observation home or in jail.
(3) In every case concerning a child or juvenile in conflict with law, the age determination inquiry shall be conducted by the court or the Board or, as the case may be, the Committee by seeking evidence by obtaining –
(a) (i) the matriculation or equivalent certificates, if available; and in the absence whereof;
(ii) the date of birth certificate from the school (other than a play school) first attended; and in the absence whereof;
(iii) the birth certificate given by a corporation or a munici
Raju and Anr. vs. State of Haryana ((2010) 3 SCC 235) 7
Hari Ram vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. ((2009) 13 SCC 211) 7
Bhoop Ram vs. State of U.P. ((1989) 3 SCC 1) 8
Rajinder Chandra vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Anr. ((2002) 2 SCC 287) 9
Arnit Das vs. State of Bihar ((2000) 5 SCC 488) 10
Ravinder Singh Gorkhi vs. State of U.P. ((2006) 5 SCC 584) 11
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.