The court emphasized the need to carefully examine the genuineness and correctness of school certificates when determining juvenility, and upheld the date of birth recorded in the primary school record as the basis for decision.

JUDGMENT :

SAUMITRA DAYAL SINGH, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.

2. The present criminal revision has been filed against the order dated 31.07.2017 passed by the Special Judge S.C./S.T. Act, Mainpuri in Criminal Appeal No. 6 of 2017. By that order the learned court below has rejected the Criminal Appeal preferred by the applicant against the order of Juvenile Justice Board, Mainpuri dated 25.11.2015 in Case Crime No. 57 of 2015, under Sections 302, 323, 354, 252 IPC, Police Station Lau, District Mainpuri, by which the Juvenile Justice Board had rejected the claim made by the applicant as to his juvenility with respect to the occurrence on 20.3.2015.

3. Shorn of all the details, undisputedly the incident is of the date 20.3.2015. The applicant on his part made a claim of juvenility on the basis of his High School certificate. At the same time he had disclosed before the Juvenile Justice Board that he had studied from Class I to V at the Primary School, Muira Chak. During the course of the enquiry made by the Juvenile Justice Board, the applicant had produced his High School certificate from the Prem Prayag Kanya Inter College, Bhogaon, Mainpuri wherein the date of birth of the applicant was found to be recorded as 10.7.1997. Also, a transfer certificate was filed by the applicant claimed to have been issued by the Madan Junior Basic School, Bhogaon, Mainpuri with respect to his schooling prior to his admission at the Prem Prayag Kanya Inter College, Bhogaon, Mainpuri. The Head Master of the primary school, Muira Chak had also been examined by the Juvenile Justice Board as CW1.

4. While, according to his date of birth recorded in the High School certificate, the applicant would remain a juvenile on the date of the incident being below 18 years of age, however, the Juvenile Justice Board proceeded to reject the claim made by the applicant in view of the testimony of CW1 (Principal, Primary School, Muira Chak) who produced the scholar register, result sheet and scholarship register pertaining to the admission of the applicant at that school. According to the scholar register thus produced by CW1 the applicant's name was found mentioned at serial no. 1148 with his date of birth recorded as 30.4.1994. If that be his correct date of birth, the applicant had clearly attained the age of majority on the date of the incident being more than 20 years and 10 months of age on the date of the incident.

5. Further, with respect to the High School certificate relied upon by the applicant, the Juvenile Justice Board had examined the Principal of the Prem Prayag Kanya Inter College, Bhogaon, Mainpuri as CW3. That witness could not establish the basis on which the date of birth of the applicant came to be recorded in that school record and he did not produce the admission form of the applicant. However, since admittedly, the applicant had gained admission at that school on the basis of a Transfer Certificate, therefore, the Juvenile Justice Board further examined the Principal of the Madan Junior Basic School, Bhogaon, Mainpuri as CW4 from which institution the Transfer Certificate was claimed to have originated. In that testimony it was revealed that the applicant never studied at such school and the Transfer Certificate being relied upon by the applicant had not been issued by that school though it was the case of the applicant that he had been admitted to the Prem Prayag Kanya Inter College, Bhogaon in Class-IX after passing his Class-VIII examination from the Madan Junior Basic School, Bhogaon, Mainpuri. In such circumstances, the Juvenile Justice Board failed to give effect to the date of birth found recorded in the High School certificate of the applicant and instead gave effect to the date of birth found recorded in the record of the Primary School, Muira Chak.

6. The aforesaid order came to be challenged in appeal before the Special Judge S.C./S.T. Act, Mainpuri. The learned court below after taking n