JUDGMENT : 1. Heard Sri Rehan Ahmad Siddiqui, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Anirudh Kumar Singh, learned AGA for State. 2. In view of the proposed order notice to opposite parties no. 2 and 3 are dispensed with. 3. By means of this petition the petitioner has prayed following relief : "Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash/ set aside the impugned order dated 16-11-2023 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Hardoi in case crime No.263/2023 u/s 376-D, 506 I.P.C. 67-A IT. Act & 5G/6 P.O.CS.O Act of P.S Sandila Distt Hardoi thereby declaring the O.P. No.2 as juvenile without considering the relevant materials available on record, to secure the ends of justice & to prevent the abuse of the process of the Court." 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the impugned order dated 16.11.2023 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Hardoi is illegal, unwarranted and in the aforesaid order the learned Authority / Board concerned has ignored the apparent error, i.e. the difference of age between the opposite party no. 2 and his real sister is only five months, as per the High School certificates of both the persons and the age difference between the real brother and sister may not be five months in any manner whatsoever. The specific ground has been taken on behalf of petitioner before the Juvenile Justice Board (hereinafter referred to as the 'Board') but the Board, while considering the medical examination report, ignored the High School certificates of the opposite party no. 2 and his sister. Learned counsel has stated that the second eventuality as per section 94 of the Juvenile Justice Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') would come only when the first eventuality may not be liable to be examined and if first eventuality as per section 94 of the Act is available, the other eventuality of section 94 of the Act may not be taken into account, therefore, he has submitted that the order dated 16.11.2023 passed by the Board declaring the opposite party no. 2 as juvenile may be set aside. 2 as juvenile may be set aside. Section 94 (2) of the Act is being reproduced as under : "(2) In case, the Committee or the Board has reasonable grounds for doubt regarding whether the person brought before it is a child or not, the Committee or the Board, as the case may be, shall undertake the process of age determination, by seeking evidence by obtaining (i) the date of birth certificate from the school, or the matriculation or equivalent certificate from the concerned examination Board, if available; and in the absence thereof; (ii) the birth certificate given by a corporation or a municipal authority or a panchayat; (iii) and only in the absence of (i) and (ii) above, age shall be determined by an ossification test or any other latest medical age determination test conducted on the orders of the Committee or the Board: Provided such age determination test conducted on the order of the Committee or the Board shall be completed within fifteen days from the date of such order." 5. Sri Singh, learned AGA has firstly raised the objection regarding maintainability of this petition by submitting that the order dated 16.11.2023 may be assailed by filing revision but the learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance of the dictum of Apex Court in re: Dhariwal Tobacco Products Limited and others vs. State of Maharashtra and another : (2009) 2 Supreme Court Cases 370, Prabha Chawla vs. State of Rajasthan and another : ( 2016) 16 Supreme Court Cases 30 as well as decision of this Court in Application U/S 482 No. 20368 of 2017 : Dr. Mod. Iqbal Gaji vs. State of U.P. and another (judgment and order dated 7.4.2023) wherein it has been held that so as to prevent the abuse of the process of the law the extraordinary remedy which is inherent power of this court u/s 482 Cr.P.C. may be invoked. Sri Singh has further submitted that in the present case as per the High School certificate of the opposite party no. 2 he was a person below the age of 16 years but when the aforesaid fact was disputed before the Board on the basis of two High School Mark sheets one of the opposite party no. Sri Singh has further submitted that in the present case as per the High School certificate of the opposite party no. 2 he was a person below the age of 16 years but when the aforesaid fact was disputed before the Board on the basis of two High School Mark sheets one of the opposite party no. 2 and second of his real sister wherein the age difference between the brother and sister is only five months the Board directed for medical examination and on the basis of medical examination report dated 1.11.2023 the age of opposite party was determined as 16 years, therefore, on the basis of aforesaid examination the opposite party no. 2 was declared juvenile. Therefore, Sri Singh has stated that there is no infirmity or illegality in the order dated 16.11.2023 and the aforesaid order impugned should not be said to be an abuse of the process of law in any manner whatsoever. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record as well as having regard the dictum of Apex Court in re: Dhariwal Tobacco Products Limited and others vs. State of Maharashtra and another : (2009) 2 Supreme Court Cases 370, Prabha Chawla vs. State of Rajasthan and another : ( 2016) 16 Supreme Court Cases 30 as well as decision of this Court in Application U/S 482 No. 20368 of 2017 : Dr. Mod. Iqbal Gaji vs. State of U.P. and another (judgment and order dated 7.4.2023), at the outset I held that if there is any case wherein despite there being an alternative remedy but there is also an apparent abuse of the process of law, the powers of this Court u/s 482 Cr.P.C. may be invoked to cure such abuse of the process of law, therefore, in that way this petition is maintainable u/s 482 Cr.P.C. 7. So far as the merits of the case are concerned the perusal of the impugned order dated 16.11.2023 makes it crystal clear that after perusing the High School Certificate of the opposite party no. 2 whereby it appeared to the Board that opposite party no. So far as the merits of the case are concerned the perusal of the impugned order dated 16.11.2023 makes it crystal clear that after perusing the High School Certificate of the opposite party no. 2 whereby it appeared to the Board that opposite party no. 2 is juvenile but considering the objection from the side of the petitioner to the effect that there may not be age difference between the real brother and sister of five months, so the direction for medical examination was issued and after perusing the medical examination report dated 1.11.2023 wherein the fact emerged that the opposite party no. 2 appears to be aged about 16 years, he has been declared juvenile, therefore, there is no illegality or infirmity in the order dated 16.11.2023. Hence, there is no need to interfere in this matter. 8. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed. 9. However, it is always open to the petitioner to raise all the aforesaid pleas and grounds before the learned trial court and it is needless to say that the learned trial court may consider those pleas and grounds at the appropriate stage of trial strictly in accordance with law. Notably, the allegations against the opposite party no. 2 are very serious and if those allegations are proved beyond all reasonable doubts, the learned trial court may award appropriate punishment considering the amended provisions of Juvenile Justice Act as well as relevant sections of Indian Penal Code, if the trial court finds it appropriate to do so.