Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 348 (PNJ)

Sushil Kumar v. State of Haryana

2013-03-13

PARAMJEET SINGH

body2013
JUDGMENT Paramjeet Singh, J. (Oral): Instant revision petition has been filed challenging the order dated 7.4.2012 whereby an application moved by the petitioner Sushil Kumar to declare him a juvenile has been declined by the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Panipat. The contention raised by Learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the date of birth of the petitioner is 21.12.1992 and the same has been described in the Middle Standard Examination certificate issued by the Board of School Education, Haryana on March 29, 2006 (Annexure P-1). Brief facts of the case are that an FIR No.393 dated 27.7.2010 under Sections 148, 149, 323, 324, 326/506 IPC was registered against the petitioner and other co-accused. The petitioner filed an application through his mother in the trial court that he is a juvenile, which was dismissed by the trial court vide order dated 26.2.2011. Aggrieved against that order, he preferred an appeal before learned Additional Sessions Judge, Panipat which too has been dismissed vide order dated 7.4.2012. Hence this petition. The only contention raised by learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is a juvenile; his date of birth is 21.12.1992 as described in Annexure P-1, the certificate of Middle Stand Examination issued by the Board of School education, Haryana. In view of this, learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that as per Rule 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007 (in short the Rules), the certificate issued by the school or specifically when it is issued by a Education Board with regard to matriculation examination is admissible as per Rule 12(3)(a)(i). Rule 12(3)(a)(i) stipulates that the matriculation or equivalent certificate, if available and in the absence whereof; (ii) the date of birth certificate from the school (other than a play school) first attended; and in the absence whereof; (iii) the birth certificate given by a corporation or a municipal authority or a Panchayat, shall be taken into consideration in every case concerning a child or juvenile in conflict with law, the age inquiry shall be conducted by the court or the Board or the committee by seeking evidence and obtaining the same. In the case of a juvenile, the Principal Magistrate is required to make an inquiry and submit report regarding that. In the case of a juvenile, the Principal Magistrate is required to make an inquiry and submit report regarding that. In this case, however, no inquiry was conducted by the Juvenile Justice Board, rather the Chief Judicial Magistrate declined the application by appreciating the evidence on its own record. Keeping in view the fact that the petitioner has been issued middle standard certificate by the Education Board wherein his date of birth is recorded as 21.12.1992, at that time the petitioner was studying in DAV Senior Secondary School, Sewah (Panipat), this certificate can be taken into consideration in view of Rule 12(3)(a)(i) and (ii). Learned Counsel for the State failed to rebut the same. In the above circumstances, this Court deems it appropriate that the order of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate dated 26.2.2011 and that of learned Additional Sessions Judge dated 7.4.2012 is liable to be set aside. Ordered accordingly. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Panipat is directed to send the case of the petitioner before the Juvenile Justice Board which shall make an inquiry and submit report. If found eligible, then the petitioner be tried as per the provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act.