ORDER

S.K. Sahoo, J. - Heard learned counsel for the appellant Sudhira Mahanta and learned counsel for the State.

2. Perused the report dated 28.6.2016 of the Chief Judicial Magistrate-cum-Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Keonjhar. It seems that the Board has conducted enquiry in terms of the Central Rule-12 (3)(a) (ii) of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007 and Orissa Rule-22 (4)(b) (ii) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2000 and during course of inquiry, the father of the appellant so also the Headmaster incharge of Kudapi Primary School were examined and basing on their statements as well as the entry of date of birth in the Admission Register, Juvenile Justice Board, Keonjhar opined that as on the date of the occurrence i.e., 20.07.2012, the age of the appellant was seventeen years two months and five days and therefore, he had not completed the age of 18 years on the alleged date of occurrence and he was a juvenile-in-conflict with law as per the definition under Section 2 (I) of the Juvenile Justice Act.

3. In this case, the appellant faced trial under sections 366(A)/376 of the Indian Penal Code for inducing