VIKRANT KUMAR Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision has been filed against the appellate order passed by the Additional District Judge, Gorakhpur in Criminal Appeal No. 33 of 2000, arising from the order dated 17-10-2000 passed by the Juvenile Judge, Gorakhpur in Crime Case No. 277 of 2000 (State v. Vikrant alias Sonu) under Section 377/511, I.P.C. Police Station Badhalganj, District Gorakhpur.

(2.) On 7-8-2000 a report was lodged against the applicant for an offence under Section 377/511, I.P.C. PS Badhalganj. The case was registered as Crime No. 277/2000/-. When the charge sheet was submitted in court the applicant claimed himself to be a juvenile and sought the benefit of Juvenile Justice Act thereby desired to be tried by a Juvenile Judge. In support of its case he had filed a High School Certificate issued from the Board of High School and Intermediate Education, U.P. Allahabad. In this certificate the date of birth of the applicant was mentioned as 1-1-85. The informant opposite party No. 2 strongly contested the claim of his being a juvenile in revision and advanced the submission that he appeared in High School examination in 1998 from National Inter College Badhalganj. The said school has not issued a certificate to him on his demand. It is demanding an appropriate order from the Court for issuing the same to him. He made an application before Juvenile Judge for giving him necessary order in this regard. An order was given but despite that the copy of school leaving certificate was not issued to him. This fact was brought to the notice of the court by filing an application by the informant opposite party No. 2. Despite that the court rejected his plea on the ground that no power is available to it under the law to force the Principal of National Inter College, Badhal-ganj to send a copy of the same or to direct him to appear in this court along with the necessary documents. The applicant was subjected to medical examination also. The medical examination report shows that he was about 17 years at the time of his medical examination. The complainant-informant had also filed a copy of extract of Parivar Register. According to which the year of birth of this applicant was shown 1980. This had been challenged by the father of the accused by filing an affidavit wherein it has been averred that in the copy filed by the informant the date of birth was wrongly shown. Apart from it the date shown therein is that of his eldest son and not of this applicant. No counter-affidavit was filed by the informant to the affidavit filed by the father of this applicant.

(3.) In these circumstances the Juvenile Court preferred to accept the High School Certificate produced by the father of the applicant as admissible in evidence. Placing the reliance on the documents he declared the applicant a Juvenile. In the impugned appeal the above order was disturbed.