Research › Browse › Judgment

Supreme Court of India · body

2006 DIGILAW 297 (SC)

SUNIL RATHI v. STATE OF U. P.

2006-03-10

ALTAMAS KABIR, B.P.SINGH

body2006
ORDER 1. Heard counsel for the parties. 2. Special leave is granted. 3. The question that arises in the instant appeal is whether the petitioner on the date of occurrence was juvenile. 4. We have perused the order of the High Court. The High Court came to the conclusion, after considering the certificates produced, that they did not conclusively prove that he was juvenile. However, when this objection was raised, the petitioner was not sent for examination by the Medical Board to ascertain his age. Normally, in a case where the evidence is not clear and convincing, the report of the Medical Board is of some assistance. 5. In these circumstances, we set aside the order of the High Court and direct that the petitioner be examined by a Medical Board which shall ascertain his age and submit its report to the trial court. Thereafter, the trial court will take the report into consideration and pass appropriate orders. 6. This appeal is allowed in the above terms.