ORDER :

1. By way of the present application, invoking the High Court's power under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant has prayed that the order dated 16.03.2022 be recalled.

2. The basic bone of contention is, the age of the accused, for which the present applicant has approached this Court on two occasions and has traveled even up to the Supreme Court.

3. The backdrop facts are that a First Information Report (FIR No. 185/2021 dated 24.08.2021) came to be registered at Police Station Jai Narain Vyas Colony, Bikaner for offences punishable under sections 376(D), 363, 354, 506, 376(2) (n) and 450 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE and under sections 5(G), 6, 7, 8, 16 and 27 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and under sections 66E, 67A of the Information Technology Act, 2008, accusing the respondent No. 2 (M) to have committed the sexual assault upon minor daughter of the applicant.

4. At the time of registration of the FIR and during the investigation, the Investigating Officer did not treat the accused to be a juvenile. When the matter went before the competent Court (namely POCSO Court), an application came to be moved before the trial Court with a stand that since the accused is a minor, he be tried under the provisions of Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 2015').

5. Along with the application, the accused produced a certificate issued by the Municipal Corporation, Bikaner in which his date of birth was shown as 31.10.2003. On the basis of the certificate so produced by the respondent-accused, the POCSO Court accepted the claim of the respondent and vide order dated 17.02.2022 held that the trial is required to be proceeded under the provisions of the Act of 2015.

6. The said order was challenged by the present petitioner by way of a petition (S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 1202/2022) filed under Section 482 of the of the Code of Criminal Procedure. While challenging the said order, it was prayed by the petitioner that a medical examination/ossification test of the respondent be conducted so as to determine his correct age. Such request was turned down by this Court by way of order dated 16.03.2022, inter-alia observing that since the certificate issued by the Municipal Corporation was available, conducting medical examination/ossification test was not permissible in view of the express provision contained in Section 94(2)(iii) of the Act of 2015.

7. The trial was transferred to the Juvenile Justice Board, Bikaner (hereinafter referred to as “the JJ Board or the Board”). During the course of the trial, the petitioner obtained various documents relating to the accused under the Right to Information Act, 2005 such as school admission form; the copy of affidavit furnished by the father of the accused; transfer certificate; scholar register and mark-sheet of the matriculation, which depicted the date of birth of the accused to be 31.01.2001.

8. The petitioner moved an application dated 13.04.2022 before the JJ Board under Section 94(2) of the Act of 2015, which was rejected by the Board on 21.05.2022, interalia observing that the order whereby the POCSO Court had held the accused to be juvenile has attained finality. And since such order has been affirmed by the High Court vide order dated 16.03.2022, the Board was bound and that there was no power to review.

9. The petitioner assailed the order dated 21.05.2022 by way o