VIKAS CHAUDHARY Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE challenge in this petition under Sections 397 & 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) is to an order dated 2nd January 2009 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ), Delhi holding that the petitioner cannot be held to be a juvenile on the date of the commission of the offence and thereby rejecting the application filed by the petitioner for sending him before the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) for trial.

(2.) THE background to the filing of the present case is that a complaint was lodged by Vimal Chaddha with the Police Station Ashok Vihar that his 20 year old son Prakash Chaddha @ Sunny, who had gone out with his friends on 18th January 2003 had not returned, and was missing. FIR No. 34 of 2003 was registered on that basis. On the next day, 19th January 2003, the first of the ransom calls was received by the complainant. The petitioner Vikas Chaudhary was suspected by the police of having committed the offence. It appears that soon thereafter on 21st January 2003, an order permitting interception of the landline phone number of the complainant and a mobile phone was passed by the competent authority. The petitioner was, however, arrested only on 4th May 2003. At the end of the investigation a charge sheet was filed on 22nd July 2003. Inter alia the charge sheet recorded that the last of the ransom calls was made to the complainant on 11th March 2003 by the petitioner, even after the complainants son Prakash Chadhha had been murdered. The case of the prosecution is that the kidnapped boy was murdered on 18th January 2003 itself.

(3.) THE said application was dismissed by the court of the learned ASJ on 24th August 2005 after recording that the Bone Age X -Ray showed him to be between 22 and 25 years. The trial court rejected the school leaving certificate and preferred the medical evidence. The trial court concluded that the petitioners age on the date of incident was around 19 years and 5 months.