MUKESH Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Satya Veer Singh, learned counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

(2.) The application 40-B was rejected by learned Additional Sessions Judge on the ground that the incident took place on 1.3.1998 and the date of birth of the accused - revisionist Mukesh in the school certificate is 1.7.1984. No affidavit was filed in support of the application. There was some overwriting on the date of birth and the school certificate appears to be doubtful. It was further observed that at the time of surrender, the accused - revisionist did not claim himself to be a juvenile and the application was moved at a very belated stage.

(3.) It is apparent from the aforesaid provision that an application under Section 7A of the Act can be moved at any stage of the trial. It cannot be rejected on the ground that earlier, such a plea was not raised. Even at the stage of judgment or even after conviction, the plea of juvenility can be raised. Therefore, mere delay in filing the application is not a sufficient ground to reject the application.