The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of following the specific procedure for age determination as laid down in the Juvenile Justice Act and the 2007 Rules, the admissibility of different types of certificates and documents for age determination, and the need for a thorough inquiry when there are conflicting documents regarding the date of birth of the accused juvenile.

JUDGMENT

Ms. Jaishree Thakur, J. - The petitioner seeks to challenge order dated 06.05.2015 passed by Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Charkhi Dadri, and order dated 06.09.2016 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Bhiwani, in F.I.R. No. 356 dated 16.12.2014 under Sections 376/511/323/506 IPC registered at Police Station Badhra, by virtue of which respondent-Sunil has been declared to be a juvenile.

2. In brief, the facts are that a FIR came to be registered against a respondent-Sunil, during which proceedings an application was preferred for declaring respondent-Sunil as a juvenile. It was contended that on the date of occurrence i.e 16.12.2014, the respondent-Sunil was a juvenile. In support of this argument, the father of the accused appeared as a witness and filed Matriculation Certificate of the accused which would reflect his date of birth as 15.01.1998. Whereas, the prosecution relied upon a Birth Certificate reflecting the date of birth to be 07.12.1996, while contending that the accused ought to be tried as a major.

3. The Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Charkhi Dadri, by impugned order dated 06.06.2015 held the accused to be a juvenile at the time of alleged occurrence which order was challenged before Additional Sessions Judge, Bhiwani, in an appeal. Reliance was placed upon Rule 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules 2007 (for short "the 2007 Rules") for determination of age. The order of JMIC was upheld holding the accused respondent to be a juvenile as on the date of the occurrence. Aggrieved the instant petition has been filed.

4. Mr. V.K. Sheoran, learned counsel for the petitioner herein, contends that the record regarding the date of birth of the accused juvenile should be inquired into by conducting an inquiry. It is contended that in the instant case two certificates are available on the record showing two different date of birth and, therefore, an inquiry should be conducted. Reliance is placed upon a judgment rendered by this Court in Criminal Revision No. 2494 of 2015 Sunita Devi v. State of Punjab and another decided on 15.2.2016.

5. Per contra, Mr. J.S. Mehndiratta, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No 1, submits that the age of the petitioner is to be determined in terms of Rule 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules 2007 and there is no infirmity in the orders so passed. Reliance in this regard is been placed upon a judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in Ashwani Kumar Saxsena v. State of Madhya Pradesh, reported as (2012) 9 Supreme Court Cases 750.

6. The sole controversy with arises in this petition would be how to determine the age of juvenile in conflict with law and whether an inquiry ought to be conducted in case there are two certificates available reflecting different date of birth?

7. The juvenility has to be determined as per section 7A of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (for short "the JJ Act") and rules framed thereunder. Whenever a claim of juvenility is raised before any court or a court is of the opinion that an accused person was a juvenile on the date of commission of the offence, the court shall make an inquiry, take such evidence as may be necessary (but not an affidavit) so as to determine the age of such person, and shall record a finding. Section 7-A of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2000 is reproduced as under:-

" Section 7A - Procedure to be followed when claim of juvenility is raised before any court.

(1) Whenever a claim of juvenility is raised before any court or a court is of the opinion that an accused person was a juvenile on the date of commission of the offence, the court shall make an inquiry, take such evidence as may be necessary(but not an affidavit) so as to determine the age of such person, and shall record a finding whether the person is a juvenile or a child or not, stating his age as nearly as may be : Provided that a claim of