NASMUL HUSSAIN Vs. THE STATE OF GOA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule, made returnable forthwith. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service. Heard finally, by consent of the parties.

(2.) By this petition, the petitioner is challenging an order dated 05/11/2015, passed by the President, Children's Court at Panaji, whereby, the application Exh.D-46, filed by the petitioner, staking a claim of juvenility, has been dismissed.

(3.) The brief facts are that the petitioner is facing prosecution for the offence punishable under Section 363 of I.P.C. read with Section 8 of the Goa Children's Act. On 26/09/2014, the petitioner was referred for medical examination for the purposes of his age determination. The report exhibit C-35 sent by PW8 Dr. Ajit Dinkar, who is the Professor and Head of Oral Medicine and Radiology Department, Government College and Hospital at Goa, has certified that, based on physical, dental and radiological examination, the approximate age is between 20 to 22 years. It appears that the petitioner had filed an application Exh.D-46 claiming that he was a juvenile on the date of the incident i.e. on 24/08/2014 and as such, cannot be tried before the Children's Court. Indisputably, the petitioner was medically examined on 26/09/2014. At present, 10 prosecution witnesses are already examined, including the victim/ girl and her family members.