RAFIQ AHMED SAEED AHMED Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition, the petitioner challenges the order dated 22.5.2009 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Malegaon, declining to determine the age of the petitioner on the ground that the issue of age can be resolved only after evidence is led at the trial. Offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 307, 302, 452 and 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4 and 25 of the Arms Act have been registered against the petitioner and others. The petitioner was arrested on 20.5.2008.

(2.) In the remand report, the petitioners age was mentioned as 19 years. The petitioner made an application to the Court stating that his date of birth is 12.01.1992 and that he was a juvenile below the age of 18 years at the time of the commission of the alleged crime. The petitioner, therefore, prayed in his application for being tried under the provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, hereinafter referred to as the "Act". For proof of his age, he placed reliance on the birth certificate and extracts of birth register.

(3.) The application was opposed by the prosecution on the ground that the remand report shows the petitioners age to be 19 years and that his bail application also describes him as a major. Apparently, the petitioner stated in his memorandum statement recorded in the presence of panchas that he was a major. The trial Court considered several aspects of the matter such as the date of the trial, commencement of the trial or the date of occurrence of the offence for determining the age. However, while concluding, the trial Court relied on the age mentioned by the petitioner in the bail application and the remand papers and observed that the A.P.P. has disputed the correctness of the birth certificate as unreliable. Accordingly, the trial Court has observed that the age of the petitioner has not been authentically proved and, therefore, proceeded to reject the application.