Judgment R.L.Anand, J. 1. This order may be read in the light of the order dated 26th July, 2001 passed by the Honble Division Bench consisting of Honble Mr. Justice H.S. Bedi and Honble Mr. Justice A.S. Garg, vide which two Criminal Appeal Nos. 23-DB of 1998 (Patwari alias Vikram v. State of Haryana) and 822- DB of 1997 (Naresh alias Natwar v. State of Haryana) were heard. 2. While passing the final order, the learned Division Bench dismissed Crl. Appeal No. 23-DB of 1998 (Patwari alias Vikram v. State of Haryana) but during the course of arguments it was brought to the notice of the Honble Division Bench that Naresh alias Natwar was a juvenile. Resultantly, Crl. Appeal No. 822-DB of 1997 filed by Shri Naresh alias Natwar was adjourned to await the report of the learned Sessions Judge with regard (sic) circumstances, he was supposed to be tried by the Juvenile Court. Be that as it may, since he, along with his co-accused Patwari alias Vikram, was convicted and sentenced and that he is in custody for the last about six years, therefore, we do not want to pass an order for his fresh trial. Had he been tried by a Juvenile Court, the maximum detention of this person in the Reformatory School could not be more than three years. 3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant Shri Naresh alias Natwar has drawn our attention to several judgments reported as Bhola Bhagat etc. v. State of Bihar, 1998(1) RCR(Criminal) 21; Subhash Chaudhur v. State of Bihar, 1993(3) RCR(Criminal) 107 and Umesh Singh and another etc. v. State of Bihar, 2000(3) RCR(Criminal) 14. The consistent ratio of these three judgments is that if it is found that the accused was a juvenile and this fact was not brought to the notice of the trial Court, nor any inquiry was held about the age by the Court, in such a situation, the Honble Judges were pleased to maintain the conviction but the sentence was set aside. The ratio relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellant Shri Naresh is fully applicable to the facts in hand. We also feel it appropriate not to remit back this appeal again to the Juvenile Court, as he has already served about more than six years. The ratio relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellant Shri Naresh is fully applicable to the facts in hand. We also feel it appropriate not to remit back this appeal again to the Juvenile Court, as he has already served about more than six years. Even otherwise, he could remain in the reformatory school upto a period of three years or till he attained the age of majority. Resultantly, we maintain the conviction of Shri Naresh alias Natwar but give directions to the Jail authorities to set him at liberty forthwith, if not wanted or required by any other Court. Let intimation be sent to the Borstal Jai Hisar about the passing of this order. Crl. Appeal No 822-DB of 1997 stands disposed of.