A.F.R.

Reserved on- 23.11.2022

Delivered on- 08.12.2022

Court No. - 91

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3014 of 2021

Revisionist :- Rajat Upadhyay

Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another

Counsel for Revisionist :- Raj Kumar Kesari

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sunil Kumar Singh

AND

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3022 of 2021

Revisionist :- Rajat Upadhyay

Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another

Counsel for Revisionist :- Raj Kumar Kesari

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sunil Kumar Singh

Hon'ble Mrs. Jyotsna Sharma,J.

1.

Heard Sri Raj Kumar Kesari, learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri Sunil Kumar

Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Sri O.P. Mishra, learned A.G.A. for

the State in both the matters.

2.

Perused the record.

3.

These criminal revisions have been filed on behalf of the alleged minor through

his natural guardian/mother challenging the order dated 05.10.2021 passed by the learned

Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Court No.2,

Varanasi in both the matters in Criminal Appeal Nos.96 of 2020 and 97 of 2020 affirming

the order dated 19.11.2020 and 11.11.2020 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Varanasi

respectively, by which the applications presented by the revisionist for declaring him

juvenile were rejected and he was declared an adult.

4.

Facts in brief leading to filing of these revisions are as below:-

Two F.I.R.s were lodged against the revisionist as Case Crime No.247 of 2019, under

section 3/25 Arms Act and Case Crime No.227 of 2019, under sections- 302, 307, 34,

504, 506 I.P.C. After investigation, charge-sheets were filed and cognizance was taken by

the court concerned; thereafter, applications were moved before the Juvenile Justice

Board for declaring him juvenile along with affidavit supported by certain papers like

matriculation certificate and school certificate showing his date of birth as 02.09.2002;

the statement of C.W.1- mother Pooja Upadhyay, C.W.2- Clerk from Harsewanand Public

School, Varanasi, C.W.3- Rishikant Sharma, a Clerk from Nagar Nigam Varanasi and

C.W.4- Anand Sharma, a Clerk from Annie Besant Primary School were examined. The

Juvenile Justice Board was of the view that on the date of occurrence the accused was

above 18 years of age and passed the order in both the matters on 19.11.2020 and

11.11.2020, respectively; appeals were preferred against the aforesaid orders passed by

the Juvenile Justice Board; the appellate court dismissed the appeal and also dismissed

the application filed on behalf of the juvenile for his medical examination moved for the

purpose of determination of age.

5.

The contentions of the revisionist are as below:-

Firstly that the birth certificate issued by the Nagar Nigam Varanasi, High School

certificate, certificate from school where he studied from class-6 to class-8 showing his

date of birth as 02.09.2002 were produced; however, the court committed a grave error in

not relying on them; the Juvenile Justice Board and the appellate court instead relied on

the papers of Annie Besant Primary School, where he studied from class-1 to class-5; in

continuation of this argument, it is contended that there has been ample evidence to show

that in that school the date of birth was wrongly recorded. To support this contention, it is

stated on oath by mother of the minor that she infact gave birth to her second child on

02.09.2001 and that male child died within 15-20 days. Therefore, the birth registration in

Nagar Nigam Varanasi showing date of birth as 02.09.2001 is of her second child and not

of present minor accused, who is her third child; during the pendency of the appeals, an

application dated 04.09.2021 supported with the affidavit annexing another birth

certificate (showing date of birth 02.09.2002) issued by the Nagar Nigam Varanasi was

filed in the appellate court by the revision