J.G. Chitre, J.

1. The appellants have been convicted for an offence punishable u/s 304 pan I IPC and have been sentenced to under go 7 years RI with Fine of Rs. 10000/-, in default to undergo RI for 6 months by Addl. Sessions Judge, Agar Dist : Shajapur in the matter of S.T. 365/93 and that order is being assailed by the appellant by this appeal.

2. Shri ZA Warsi, appearing for the appellants argued that the learned trial Judge has committed error of law in holding that at the time of commission of the offence appellant Gordhan was Juvenile in view of provisions of Juvenile Justice Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as Act for short). He pointed out that the learned Judge has committal an error by giving more importance to the medical opinion than the evidence of Shri Garg who has been examined in the sessions case by defence and who has proved school leaving certificate which is Ex. D. 4. I find substance in his argument because it is the evidence of Shri Garg DW-1 that that Ex. D. 4 is the school leaving certificate showing (sic) appellant Gordhanlal was born on 3.5.78. At the time of giving evidence he has bought the school register also with him which was showing that as