The main legal point established in the judgment is the retrospective application of the Jammu and Kashmir Juvenile Justice Act, 2013, to the date of commission of the offence and the allowance for raising the plea of juvenility at any stage of the case.

1. In terms of impugned judgment dated 30-12-2011 formulated by learned Principal Sessions Judge Jammu in File No. 07/Sessions titled State v. Ajay Kumar the appellant-Ajay Kumar stands convicted of offence under Section 302/392, RPC. By virtue of order of sentence dated 5-1-2012, the appellant Ajay Kumar has been sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 10,000/- under Section 302, IPC while he has been directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and a fine of Rs. 5,000/- under Section 392, RPC. Sentence has also been imposed for default in payment of fine. Reference has also been made for confirmation of sentence of life imprisonment. The appellant has assailed the judgment of conviction and order of sentence through the medium of criminal appeal No. 05/2012 which is pending consideration before this Court. CR. MA No. 15/2015 has been filed by the appellant to seek benefit of juvenility under the provisions of J. & K. Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as JJ. Act) on the ground that on the date of commission of offence i.e. 30-8-1995, the appellant was 17 years and 7 months old as per his date of birth recorded as 1-1-1978 in the certificate issued by Headmaster, Government Boys High School Dharamsal (Kalakot). The motion is supported by the date of birth certificate relied upon by the appellant. Appellant has been permitted to place on record copy of school leaving certificate. Date of birth of appellant is reflected as 1-1-1978 in both certificates.

2. Respondent State has filed objections opposing the motion on the ground that the appellant has not raised the plea of juvenility before the trial Court during trial nor has pleaded the same as a ground in criminal appeal filed before this Court. It is further pleaded that the certificates produced by the appellant in support of his claim of juvenility cannot be relied upon. It is pleaded that the enquiry relating to juvenility has to be conducted on the basis of birth certificate issued by a Corporation/Municipal Committee/other notified authority or the matriculation or equivalent certificate or in absence of the aforesaid on the basis of findings recorded by a duly constituted medical board.

3. Heard learned counsel for appellant and learned AAG for the State-respondent.

4. JJ Act of 2013 consolidating and amending the law relating to juveniles in conflict with law and children in need of care and protection was enforced with effect from 22-7-2013. This piece of state legislation corresponds to the Central Act of 2000 with amendments introduced in 2006. The Act defines 'juvenile' or 'child' as a person who has not completed eighteenth year of age. The JJ Act of 1997 defined a female child below 18 as a juvenile but excluded a male child above 16 years of age from the definition of juvenile. JJ Act of 2013 has removed the gender discrimination and the relevant age for determining whether a child, male or female, is a juvenile is 18 years. Furthermore, a child found to have committed an offence who was earlier classified as 'delinquent juvenile' under JJ Act of 1997 has been classified as 'juvenile in conflict with law' which has been defined as under:

"2(n). "Juvenile in conflict with law" means a juvenile who is alleged to have committed an offence and has not completed eighteenth year of age as on the date of commission of such offence."

5. This Court, while elaborately dealing with the issue of determining the status of accused as juvenile in conflict with law in case titled Jaspreet Singh Vs. State reported in (2014) 1 JKJ 1 (HC) observed as under:

"..........On a plain reading of the definition of 'juvenile in conflict with law' it is manifestly clear that age on the date of commission of offence is relevant for determining the status of a person as a juvenile offender. A person not having completed eighteenth year of age as on the date of commission of offence would be a 'juvenile in conflic