JUDGMENT Hon’ble Vijay Kumar Verma, J.—Heard Sri J. S. Kashyap Advocate appearing for the applicant and AGA for the State of U.P. 2. By means of this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short, ‘the, Cr.P.C.’), order dated 30.10.2006 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Farrukhabad in case No. 130 of 2005 arising out of case crime No. 26 of 2001 under Section 302, 201/34, IPC, P.S. Mohammadabad, District Farrukhabad has been challenged. 3. By the impugned order, the application moved by the applicant for acquitting him on the basis of the principle of stare decisis, issue estoppel and resjudicata has been rejected. 4. From the record, this fact is borne out that applicant and co-accused Pappu @ Rajvir and Sarvesh Yadav were charge-sheeted under Section 302, 201/34, IPC in case crime No. 26 of 2001. Since the applicant was juvenile, hence his case was separated and was transferred to the Juvenile Justice Board, Farrukhabad. During the course of trial in case No. 130 of 2005, an application was moved on behalf of the applicant for acquitting him on the basis of the principle of stare decises etc. That application has been dismissed by the Juvenile Justice Board vide impugned order. 5. It is submitted by learned counsel that after contest co-accused Pappu @ Rajvir and Sarvesh Singh Yadav have been acquitted in Session Trial No. 158 of 2001 vide judgement and order dated 02.03.2006 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Farrukhabad and hence, on the basis of the priciple of stare decisis, the applicant also is liable to be acquitted, because the same evidence has to be led against the applicant before the Juvenile Justice Board. 6. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant and AGA, in my opinion, the applicant cannot be acquitted on the basis of the principle of Stare Decisis as held by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Rajan Rai v. State of Bihar, (2006) 1 SCC (Cri) 2009, because the judgment of session trial No. 158 of 2001 is not relevant in the case of applicant, as held by the Hon’ble Apex Court in aforesaid case. Therefore, keeping in view the specific law laid down now by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Raja Rai case (supra), the impugned order does not suffer from any illegality and interference by this Court in the said order is not warranted. 7. Consequently, the application under Section 482, Cr.P.C. is hereby dismissed. 8. However, the Juvenile Justice Board, Farrukhabad is directed to conclude the trial of the applicant Rajesh in Case No. 130 of 2005 within a period of four months from the date of filing certified copy of this order by making all possible efforts. ————