Back
N. S. SHEKHAWAT
Jamshed – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
Judgment
Mr. N.S. Shekhawat, J.
The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer to issue directions to the trial Court to summon the witness/concerned official of UIDAI, Regional Office, in view of the amendment to Section 33(1) of the Aadhar Act 2016 [made vide “the Aadhar & other laws (Amendment) Act, 2019], (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the Aadhar Act’).
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was arrayed as an accused in a case FIR No. 10/2018 under Sections 363, 366, 376 and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the POCSO Act’). In the said case, the complainant/respondent No. 3 had taken a stand that she was minor, whereas, it was the consistent stand of the petitioner that Section 6 of the POCSO Act was not made out as the prosecutrix was not a minor girl and she had produced false record regarding her age. In order to prove that the prosecutrix was a minor girl, the prosecutrix alleged that her date of birth was 31.05.2001. To prove her birth certificate as well as the age, the prosecutrix examined PW10 Ram Kumar, Clerk, MC, Faridabad, who appear
The court affirmed the accused's right to summon evidence for their defense, highlighting the importance of fair trial principles in ensuring justice.
Proper determination of the victim's age is crucial for POCSO Act applicability and correct trial proceedings, requiring verification by UIDAI when conflicting evidence exists.
Bail application – FIR registered under Sections 363/366/376/506 IPC read with Section 6 of POCSO Act, 2012 – Proper determination of age of victim is important from jurisdictional perspective which ....
The court ruled that the School Leaving Certificate and Higher Secondary documents are superior for age determination, while the Aadhar card is not conclusive proof of date of birth.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on the Aadhaar card to ascertain the age of the prosecutrix as per the mandate of section 94 of the Juvenile Justice Act.
The court ruled that credible primary documents are essential for age determination, emphasizing the Aadhar card's validity over school records in the absence of supporting evidence.
The appeal was allowed as the prosecution failed to prove the prosecutrix's age and voluntary relationship negated the charges of abduction and rape.
The importance of proving the prosecutrix's age and the need for corroboration in her statements to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
