JAI NAND SHARMA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS criminal revision has been filed against order dated 14.11.2008 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 10, Meerut in Criminal Appeal No. 228 of 2008, Jai Nand Sharma v. State of U. P., by which the appeal has been dismissed against the order dated 12.8.2008, passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Meerut in Misc. Case No. 308 of 2008 by which it has been declared that the opposite party No. 2, Amit Kumar and opposite party No. 3, Ankit Kumar were juvenile at the time, the offence under Sections 302, 323, 504 and 506, I.P.C. Crime No. 176 of 2008, P.S. Bhawanpur, district Meerut was committed.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for the revisionist and learned counsel for the opposite parties.

(3.) I have gone through the order passed by Juvenile Justice Board. The learned lower court has relied on the statement of Satpal, the father of juvenile offender who has stated that the date of birth of Amit is 19.6.1991 and of Ankit is 22.4.1994. The parents are the best witness regarding the date of birth of their children, therefore, due importance should be given to their statement which has been done by the learned lower court. Against above statement the learned Juvenile Justice Board was justified in giving less importance to the entry of age in electoral roll and family register. There is overwriting in family register which does not bear initial of the concerned authority. There is no serial number in the register. It has been stated by the witness that actual date of birth is not mentioned in this register, but it is probable date of birth. Therefore the learned Magistrate was justified in not accepting the age mentioned in the electoral roll and the family register. The learned lower court has also mentioned Mayank Rajpoot v. State of U. P., 1998 Cr LJ 2797 : 1998 (1) ACR 136, in which Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that age mentioned in the electoral roll cannot be a definite evidence as influential leader of the locality attempts to get more and more numbers of their voters who are in their favour. The learned Magistrate has relied on the entry of their date of birth in High School Certificate in which the date of birth of Amit Kumar son of Satpal has been written to 19.6.91. He has also considered the mark sheet of class 5th of Ankit Kumar issued by Nav Jyoti Public School, mark sheet of class 9th issued by N.A.S. Inter College and certificate issued by Nitu Bal Academy Junior High School, Abdullahpur, Meerut in which date of birth of Ankit has been mentioned as 22.4.1994 which has been supported by statement of C.W. 2 Balestar Singh who has stated that at serial No. 15 of S.R. Register name of Ankit Kumar son of Satpal has been entered whose date of birth has been written to be 22.4.1994. All above documents have been supported by the oral evidence of their father, Satpal. Therefore it cannot be said that on point of age the conclusion drawn by the learned Juvenile Justice Board is against the evidence in record.