OM PRAKASH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -this revision has been filed by the revisionist under the provisions of Section 53 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000,(for short the Act) feeling aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 2.8.2008 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Mathur, while disposing of Criminal Appeal No. 101 of 2008.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that the revisionist is involved in case crime No. 201 of 2006 under Sections 302, 5041.pc, P.S.Kosi Kalan, District Mathura. He has been named in the F.I.R. After investigation a charge sheet was filed against him which was submitted by the investigating officer in the Court of learned Magistrate. THEreafter the case was committed to the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge, Mathur where the case was transferred by the learned Sessions Judge. THE revisionists moved an application before the learned Judge on 29.11.2007 that he was a juvenile on the date of the alleged offence and he further prayed that his matter may be referred to the Board, vide his order dated 29.1.2008 the learned . Judge referred the matter to the Board. THE Board considered the application of the revisionist relating to his claim of juvenility and thereafter vide its order dated 4.7.2008 the Board held that on the relevant date the age of the revisionist was about 17-1/2 years and therefore he was a juvenile on that date. Feeling aggrieved by this finding opposite party No. 2 filed an appeal under Section 52 of the Act. THE learned Sessions Judge after hearing both the parties quashed the order passed by the learned Board dated 4.7.2008 and held that on the relevant date the revisionist was not a juvenile. Hence this revision.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the revisionist and the learned AGA and perused the records. It should be mentioned here that lower Court record has been received and is tagged with the file of this revision.