ORDER 1. This criminal revision under section 53 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 [for short “the Act of 2000”] has been filed against the order dated 13.10.2014 passed by Sessions Judge, Rajgarh (Biaora) in Criminal Appeal No.261/2014, whereby set aside the order passed by Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Rajgarh (Biaora) in Criminal Case No.110/2014 on 27.8.2014. 2. Brief facts of this case are that on 7.5.2014 a Crime No.223/2014 was registered against the applicant for the offences punishable under sections 376 and 342 of IPC. After investigation final report has been filed against the applicant for the aforesaid offences. The applicant moved an application that the applicant is juvenile on the date of offence, therefore, he be tried before the Juvenile Justice Board in accordance with the Act of 2000. The Board has after holding enquiry vide order dated 27.8.2014 held that on the date of offence the applicant was below 18 years of age and he was juvenile, therefore, he be dealt with as per the provisions of the Act of 2000. Against that order the prosecutrix has filed an appeal under section 52 of the Act of 2000. Learned Sessions Judge by the impugned order dated 13.10.2014 allowed the appeal and directed the Board to send the applicant for medical examination in regard to his age and after receiving the medical opinion, proceed further. Being aggrieved with this order, the applicant has filed this revision. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the appellate Court has failed to consider the provisions envisaged under rule 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007. It is true that the applicant's father has failed to prove the date of birth of the applicant, however, from the school record the date of birth of the applicant was proved i.e. 10.8.1997 and no evidence was produced in rebuttal. Therefore, on this basis Board has gave an opinion that on the date of offence the applicant was aged 16 years 6 months and 20 days. There is no illegality in the finding but learned appellate Court has totally ignored this aspect of the matter and relied upon the voter list which cannot be considered for determining the age of the juvenile. Thus, the order passed by the appellate Court is not justifiable. Therefore, it be set aside. 4. There is no illegality in the finding but learned appellate Court has totally ignored this aspect of the matter and relied upon the voter list which cannot be considered for determining the age of the juvenile. Thus, the order passed by the appellate Court is not justifiable. Therefore, it be set aside. 4. On the other hand, learned Government Advocate for the Non-applicant No.1/State supports the impugned order. 5. Learned counsel for the non-applicant No.2 submits that the applicant's father in his statement not deposed that at the time of admission he stated that applicant's date of birth is 10.8.1997. Therefore, the entries of scholar register cannot be considered. He further submits that in such a situation the appellate Court has rightly directed that in regard to age of the applicant, the medical opinion be sought. For this purpose he placed reliance on the judgment of apex Court in the case of Om Prakash v. State of Rajasthan [2012(2) MPLJ (Cri) 423]. 6. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, perused the record. 7. Rule 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007 provides the procedure to be followed in determination of age. For this purpose the Board can consider matriculation or equivalent certificates, if available and in absence the date of birth certificate from the school, other than a play school, and in absence thereof the birth certificate given by the Corporation, Municipal Authority or a Panchayat and only in absence of these documents, then medical opinion will be sought from a duly constituted Medical Board which will declare the age of the juvenile or child. 8. In the present case the applicant has failed to prove the date of birth i.e. 10.8.1997 recorded in the scholar register and has not produced any matriculation certificate or birth certificate. Therefore, the appellate Court has rightly directed the Board to sought the medical opinion in regard to age of the juvenile. 8. In the present case the applicant has failed to prove the date of birth i.e. 10.8.1997 recorded in the scholar register and has not produced any matriculation certificate or birth certificate. Therefore, the appellate Court has rightly directed the Board to sought the medical opinion in regard to age of the juvenile. Hon'ble apex Court in the case of Om Prakash (supra), held as under :- “The benefit of benevolent legislation under the Juvenile Justice Act obviously will offer protection to a genuine child accused/juvenile who does not put the Court into any dilemma as to whether he is a juvenile or not by adducing evidence in support of his plea of minority but in absence of the same, reliance placed merely on shaky evidence like the school admission register which is not proved or oral evidence based on conjectures leading to further ambiguity, cannot be relied upon in preference to the medical evidence for assessing the age of the accused. In the present case since the age of the accused could not be proved merely on the basis of the school record as the Courts below in spite of its scrutiny could not record a finding of fact that the accused, in fact, was a minor on the date of the incident. Hence, in a situation when the school record itself is not free from ambiguity and conclusively proves the minority of the accused, medical opinion cannot be allowed to be overlooked or treated to be of no consequence.” 9. In the light of the dictum of Hon'ble apex Court and the rule 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007, I am of the view that there is no illegality in the order passed by the Sessions Judge, Rajgarh (Biaora). Hence, there is no merit in this revision. The revision is hereby dismissed. 10. Copy of the order be sent to the Juvenile Justice Board for information.