This application has been filed for quashing the orders dated 5.12.2008 (Annexure-2) and 15.12.2008 (Annexure-2) passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Latehar and also for quashing of the order dated 17.11.2008 (Annexure-2) passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Latehar in G.A. No. 310 of 2008 arising out of Balumath P.S. Case No. 56 of 2008 whereby courts having accepted the plea of Imran Ansari, Md. Junaid Anwar and Kirani Oraon, respondents 2, 3 and 4 of being juvenile on the date of occurrence declared them juvenile. That apart, the order dated 31.3.2009 (Annexue-4) passed by the learned Sessiems Judge, Latehar has also been sought to be quashed whereby learned Sessions Judge refused to set aside .the aforesaid three orders.

2. The facts giving rise to this application are that on 24.7.208 one Mahesh Gupta @ Lucky, nephew of the petitioner was kidnapped for which Lalpur P.S. Case No. 134 of 2008 was instituted under Sections 364A, 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code. In course of investigation, some of the miscreants were nabbed by the police, who disclosed that the victim has been murdered and then Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code was added. However, before the accused were arrested by the police they had resorted to firing upon the police party and, as such, another case was lodged as Balumath P.S. Case No. 56 of 2008 under Sections 353 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. It appears that the accused persons first were remanded in Lalpur P.S. Case No. 134 of 2008 but when production warrant was issued by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Latehar, they were remanded in jail custody in connection with Balumath P.S. Case No. 56 of 2008.

4. On completion of investigation of Balumath P.S. Case No. 56 of 2008, police submitted charge sheet on 14.11.2008 and then on 25.11.2008 cognizance was taken. Thereupon on 5.12.2008 an application was filed on behalf of Imran Ansari stating therein that he is a juvenile as his date of birth recorded in school leaving certificate granted by S.S. High School, Balumath is as 1.9.1991 and, therefore, the prayer was made to send his case to Juvenile Justice Board. The said application was accompanied by Xerox copy of the school leaving certificate only. On that application, learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Latehar, vide order dated 5.12.2008 declared him juvenile as the certificate does indicate the age of the appellant Imran Ansari less than 18 years and, therefore, he sent the record before the Juvenile Justice Board. Similarly, an application was filed on behalf of Md. Junaid Anwar on 6.12.2008 stating therein that as per the certificate granted by Jharkhand Academic Council and also by Rajkiyakrit Vidyalaya, 8alumath, he is aged about 15 years and hence, he be declared as Juvenile. Accordingly, the court putting reliance on the certificate declared him Juvenile, vide order dated 15.11.2008 by assessing his age less than 16 years.

6. Again, an application for declaration of the appellant Kirani Oraon as Juvenile was filed on 24.10.2008 annexing therewith 0 photocopy of the certificate granted by the Principal, Rajkiyakrit Vidyalaya, Balumath. Accordingly, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate declared him as Juvenile, vide its order dated 17.11.2008 and at the same time record was ordered to be sent before the Juvenile Justice Board for disposal.

7. All the three orders were challenged before the learned Sessions Judge, Latehar, who by its order dated 31.3.2009 (Annexure-4) held those applications not maintainable and hence, declined to interfere with the matter. However, it was observed that Juvenile Justice Board after taking evidence and after giving opportunity to the parties will pass the order on the point of age of the appellants.

8. Being aggrieved with the aforesaid orders, the petitioner has preferred this application.

9. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that learned Sessions Judge by assu