Back
ASHUTOSH KUMAR
Krishna – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background regarding fir and applications. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. arguments on juvenile status and evidence requirements. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. court's analysis of age determination process. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 4. decision to quash lower court's order. (Para 20) |
ORDER :
(Ashutosh Kumar, J.)
Both these criminal revision petitions have been filed against the order dated 19.01.202021 passed by the learned Special Court POCSO Act, District Dholpur (hereinafter referred to as the 'trial Court'). Therefore, both these criminal revision petitions are being disposed of by this common order.
2. Both these criminal revision petitions have been filed by the petitioners against order dated 19.01.2021 passed by the learned Special Court POCSO Act, District Dholpur in Sessions Case No.5/2020 titled as State of Rajasthan v. Krishna and Anr. by which learned trial Court has rejected the applications of petitioners: Krishna and Abhishek, by which they had pleaded to be treated as juveniles.
3. The relevant facts, in brief are that an FIR No.250/2019 under Sections 363 and 366A IPC was lodged by the complainant Chanchal S/o Suresh Chand alleging that one Abhishek
For age determination in juvenile cases, documentary proof outweighs medical testing, as specified in Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015.
The court emphasized the necessity of a proper enquiry into juvenility, allowing the accused to present evidence and examine the Medical Board, rather than relying solely on medical opinion.
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 determination of a juvenile's age should consider all relevant facts and circumstances of the case, emphasizing the importance of documentary evidence and the need for a just view to ensure justi....
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.
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
