Hon’ble Anil Kumar Agarwal, J.—Heard Mr. Rakesh Dubey and Sri Rajiv Gupta, learned counsel for the revisionist, learned AGA for the State of U.P., Mr. Pradeep Chandra, learned counsel for the respondents and perused the relevant documents on record.

2. This criminal revision has been filed against the judgment and order dated 15.4.2010, passed by Additional District Judge, Court No. IX, Kanpur Dehat in Criminal Appeal No. 37 of 2004; Sanjay and others v. State of U.P., whereby the revisionist’s application 64-Kha for declaring him juvenile has been partly rejected.

3. With the consent of counsel for the parties the present revision is being disposed of at the stage of admission.

4. The brief relevant facts of this revision are that an incident took place on 16.11.1989 at about 7.00 a.m. within the Circle of Police Station Mangalpur, District Kanpur Dehat, in which police had submitted charge-sheet against the revisionist Brijesh Awasthi and Sanjay under Sections 323 and 324 read with Section 34 I.P.C. (Case Crime No. 281 of 1989), Police Station Mangalpur. The Court of A.C.J.M. Court No. 1, Kanpur Dehat, who tried this case, on 13.8.2004 convicted the revisionist and Sanjay under Sections 323 and 324 read with Section 34 I.P.C.. Both had preferred Criminal Appeal No. 37 of 2004 before Sessions Judge, Kanpur Dehat, which was transferred to A.D.J.-IX for hearing. During the pendency of said appeal on 10.10.2007, the revisionist and Sanjay both had jointly moved an application 64 Kha with the allegation that they were juvenile on the date of incident, hence be declared juvenile. In support the revisionist had filed photocopy of High School Mark-Sheet of U.P. Intermediate Education Board dated 19th June, 1988 (paper No. 65-Kha/3) and certified copy of family register (65-Kha/4). In both documents the date of birth of revisionist was mentioned as 11.1.1972 and in family register the date of birth of Sanjay was mentioned as 3.5.1975. During the enquiry, in appellate Court two witnesses, namely, Satendra Singh (PW-1), Assistant Clerk of Babu Dasrath Singh Inter College, Orangabad and Visnu Kumar Gupta (PW-2) Panchayat Adhikari of Village Gram Panchayat Jagdishpur Vikas Khand Jhinzak, Kanpur Dehat were examined from the side of revisionist, who proved the photocopy of High School (paper 101-Kha) and photocopy of Parivar Register (Paper 126-Kha/2) and stated that according to these papers the date of birth of Brijesh was 11.1.11972 and Sanjay was 3.5.1975. Sanjay was also examined by Medical Board and according to the report he was above 30 years on examination date. Learned A.D.J., Court No. IX, Kanpur Dehat on 15.4.2010 decided the application of the revisionist holding that on incident date i.e. 16.11.1989, Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 was in existence and according to Section 2(H) of the 1986 Act a person who had not completed age of 16 years would be deemed to be juvenile. According to the High School Mark Sheet of Brijesh Awasthi his date of birth was 11.1.1972 and on incident day age of Brijesh Awasthi comes 17 years 10 months 5 days, which was above 16 years, hence the revisionist was not juvenile while Sanjay was below 16 years which was juvenile and, therefore, appellate Court holding that the revisionist is not juvenile at the time of incident rejected the application (64-Kha) in part and allowed the application in part regarding Sanjay, hence Brijesh Awasthi preferred this revision.

5. Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that the learned Additional Session Judge has committed gross illegality in passing the impugned order dated 15.4.2010 and acted in highly technical manner in holding that the revisionist was not a juvenile. As per the observation of Court below that the revisionist was aged about 17 years 10 months and 5 days on the date of offence i.e. 16th November, 1989, but holding that the revisionist was not juvenile on the incident date followed the old provisions of Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 instea