( 1 ) CHALLENGE in this criminal revision petition is to the order dated 18th November, 2009 rendered by Special Judge, Dacoity Affected Area, Bharatpur, whereby the learned Special Judge determined the age of the petitioner and found him to be above the age of 18 years.

( 2 ) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and carefully perused the relevant material on record, including the impugned order.

( 3 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has canvassed that the occurrence of this case took place on 22nd December, 2008 and FIR of this fact came to be lodged in the offences under Sections 224, 225, 332, 353, 307, 395, 397 of IPC with Police Station Mathura Gate, Bharatpur. The petitioner was arrested on 26th April, 2009 and after completion of investigation, a supplementary police report under Section 173 (2) of Cr. P. C. came to be filed in the court of Special Judge, Dacoity Affected Area, Bharatpur on 7th June, 2009. The petitioner filed an application before the concerned Court with regard to determination of his age. The learned trial Court conducted an inquiry in accordance with the provisions of law and did not rely upon the Board certificate, wherein the date of birth of the petitioner was recorded as 10th July, 1991 and on the contrary, placed reliance on the medical report, which was prepared by the Doctors on the basis of ossification test. The Medical Board having conducted the ossification test, determined the age of the petitioner to be between 20-21 years.

( 4 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner took me through the provisions of Rule 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007 (hereinafter to be referred to as Rules of 2007) and contended that the above Rule categorically contemplates that the medical opinion with regard to the age of the delinquent child on the basis of medical evidence, shall be taken into consideration only when the Matriculation or equivalent certificate or date of birth certificate issued by the School or birth certificate given by a Corporation or a Municipal Authority is not available.

( 5 ) RULE 12 of the Rules, 2007 is reproduced thus:

12. Procedure to be followed in determination of age:- (i) In very case concerning a child or a juvenile in conflict with law, the court of 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 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 municipal authority or a panchayat; (b) and only in the absence of either (i), (ii) or (iii) of clause (a) above, the medical opinion will be sought from a duly constituted Medical Board, which will declare the age of the juvenile or child. In case exact assessment of the age cannot be done, the Court or the Board or, as the case may be, the Committee, for the reasons to be recorded by them, may, if considered necessary, give benefit to the child or juvenile by considering his/her age on lower side within the margin of one year. and, while passing orders in such case shall, aft

Click Here to Read the rest of this document