G. S. N. TRIPATHI, J. ( 1 ) THIS is a Criminal Revision filed under S. 397 Cr. P. C. against the order dated 6-1-96 passed by the 1st Addl. Sessions Judge. Meerut, whereby he has ordered that the accused Fanu @ Irfan be tried in the regular court. ( 2 ) IN this case, an incident of rape took place on 22-10-94 at P. S. Bhagwanpur, Distt. Hardwar. The accused Fanu @ Irfan was named as principal culprit. The victim was a girl of 8 years. ( 3 ) BEFORE the learned Magistrate concerned. the accused took the plea that he was a "juvenile" and his case should be heard by the Juvenile Court only. and not by a court of regular jurisdiction. Before the learned Magistrate, reliance was placed on a School Leaving Certificate, paper on 9/3, wherein the date of birth of the applicant was recorded as 20-1-81. According to this certificate, the age of the applicant on the date of occurrence was about 13 years. That certificate was proved by Sri Shakeel Hasan. Not only this, the opinion of the Chief Medical Officer, Hardwar was obtained, who opined that the age of the boy was about 15 years on 16-1-95. Therefore, decidedly on the date of occurrence, the accused was below 16 years of age. As against it, the prosecution relied upon a Pariwar Register and personal opinion of the learned Magistrate, that the accused appeared to be more than 16 years of age. 3a. The word "juvenile" has been defined in Section 2, sub-clause (h) of Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 as follows:-"juvenile means a boy who has not attained the age of 16 years or a girl, who has not attained the age of 18 years. "therefore, decidedly the accused was a "juvenile" on the date of occurrence. ( 4 ) BEFORE the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, reliance was placed on several rulings the tenor of which was that margin of about 2 years occurs in the medical certificate and the court should take notice of the same. ( 5 ) I think that at this stage. the evidence relied upon by the accused was sufficient to convince the court that the accused was a juvenile. The order of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge concerned suffers from this misinterpretation of law. Therefore, the personal opinion of the learned Magistrate concerned should not have been over-weighed. ( 5 ) I think that at this stage. the evidence relied upon by the accused was sufficient to convince the court that the accused was a juvenile. The order of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge concerned suffers from this misinterpretation of law. Therefore, the personal opinion of the learned Magistrate concerned should not have been over-weighed. The opinion given by the Chief Medical Officer as well as the entry made in the Scholars Register were on record. The order of the Addl. Sessions Judge, Meerut, therefore, deserves to be quashed. ( 6 ) THE revision is allowed. The order passed by the 1st Addl. Sessions Judge, Meerut dated 6-1-1996 is, hereby, quashed. It is held that the accused is a juvenile and he was a juvenile on the date of occurrence. Therefore, his case should be tried by the Court created by the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 only and not by a regular court. All the documents relating to this case, shall be transmitted forthwith to the court created under the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986, preferably within a month from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before the learned court below and the Juvenile Court shall proceed according to law. Revision allowed. .