VIPIN Vs. STATE OF U P AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal revision has been preferred against the order dated 21.2.2005 passed by Special Additional Session Judge, Baghpat in bail application no. 868 of 2004 (State of U.P. vs. Vipin) arising out of Case Crime No.275 of 2004 under sections 302, 120-B IPC PS Chhaprauli, District Baghpat whereby the revisionist has been held to be major and not a juvenile and his application for getting himself declared a juvenile has been dismissed.

(2.) The facts as mentioned in the impugned order are that in a bail application moved from the side of the revisionist it was stated that he had appeared in the examination of High School in the year 2002 from Vaidic Inter College, Baraut where his date of birth was recorded as 10.11986 and the same was mentioned in High School mark sheet which is also entered in the certificate issued by Janta Vaidic Inter College. The original register containing name of the students and transfer certificate were enclosed with the said application. The occurrence took place on 09.09.2004 and on that date his age was 17 years and nine months, hence he should be treated to be a juvenile in conflict with law under the provisions of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2000 (to be referred in short as "Act of 2000").

(3.) In the impugned order it is mentioned that a report was called for from the Chief Medical Officer, who after having held medical examination, submitted his report, holding his age to be 22 years. From the side of the revisionist, Rajendra Pal Singh, Head Clerk of Janta Vaidic Inter College, Baraut was examined as APW-1, Sukram Pal, father of the revisionist was examined as APW-2 and the photocopies of enrollment register of the students of Janta Vaidic Inter College, Baraut, Sarvoday Mandir Inter College, Mahawatpur Bawli, Meerut and transfer certificate, were also produced, in which his date of birth was shown to be 10.12.1986. Learned court below has mentioned in the impugned order that the main emphasis laid by the revisionist is upon the transfer certificate (Shankraman Praman-patra) pertaining to his failure in class X and on the enrollment register of the students and transfer certificate belonging Sarvoday Vaidic Inter College, Mahawatpur-Bawli District Meerut and on the basis of these documents he wanted to get himself declared a juvenile. It is recorded in the order that father of the juvenile Sukram Pal had stated that his son had studied in Sarvoday School upto IX and X classes. Before that, he used to study in New Modern Junior High School, Gandhi Road, Baraut from class VI onwards to class VIII and till class V he had studied in Basic Primary Pathshala, Loyan. He had failed in examination of X class twice. In cross-examination he has not pointed out that he had ever studied in Janta Vaidic Inter College. He has also stated that he had two sons, but he had no knowledge about the other son Gaurav. The Head Clerk of Janta Vaidic Inter College was examined as APW-1 who stated that on the basis of transfer certificate issued by Sarvoday Mandir Inter College, admission was given to the revisionist, but he refused to disclose as to whether transfer certificate which was issued by Sarvoday Inter College was false or genuine. He also could not disclose whether the signature on the transfer certificate was of the Principal of the college or not. It was further mentioned that it is admitted by the father of the revisionist that the revisionist had studied in Basic Primary Pathshal, Loyan upto class V, hence for the first time the date of birth must have been mentioned in that school. Therefore, the certificate of that school was very essential to be filed because on the basis of that, he would have been given admission in class VI. No document has been produced from the side of the revisionist of his age recorded at the time when he took admission in class VI. The date of birth which was recorded at the time when he was studying in Basic Primary Pathshala was the basis of his date of birth but no such document had been filed by the revisionist nor any explanation given as to why the same could not be filed. His father Sukram Pal had also not stated that he had gone to get the revisionist admitted in Basic Primary Pathshala and had got his age entered there. In these circumstances the court held that it was difficult to arrive on a conclusion about the age of the revisionist, on the basis of the statement of his father. It was often seen that people would get the age of their wards reduced at the time of their entry in school. Further, it is recorded that on the basis of the report of Chief Medical Officer, Meerut, his age was found to be 22 years and even if a benefit of two years on the lower side was given to the revisionist, he could not be less than 19 years old on the date of occurrence and ultimately concluded that the accused-revisionist was more than 19 years old on the date of occurrence and hence could not be treated to be a juvenile in conflict of law.