SIMANCHAL BEHERA @ KUNA @ ROWDY Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner in this application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has called in question the order dated 22.9.2011 passed in G.R. Case No. 457 of 2011 by the learned S.D.J.M., Bhubaneswar.

(2.) THE facts reveal that the petitioner was forwarded to the court of the learned S.D.J.M. in connection with the aforesaid G.R. Case as accused for commission of offence under sections 147/148/341/376/323/302 IPC read with sections 25/27 of the Arms Act by the I.I.C., Kharavelanagar Police Station, mentioning the age of the petitioner as 19 years. A petition was filed on behalf of the petitioner under section 7 -A of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (for short, 'the Act) to declare him as a juvenile and to send him to the Juvenile Justice Board for his trial. After filing of the aforesaid petition, the learned S.D.J.M. made an enquiry and examined three witnesses, who are the Principal of Biju Patnaik Science and Technology, a teacher of the High School and the Principal of Venkateswar English Medium School, Bhubaneswar.

(3.) IN the impugned order, the learned S.D.J.M. vividly discussing the evidence adduced by the P.Ws 1 to 3 and the entries made in the school admission register and taking note of the contentions raised before him as well as the decision in the case of Brij Mohan Singh v. Priyabrat Narain Sinha, AIR 1965 SC 282 rejected the plea of the petitioner. In the case of Brij Mohan Singh (supra), the Supreme Court made an observation that in actual life, it often happens that persons give false age of the boy at the time of his admission to a school so that later in life he could have an advantage when seeking public service for which a minimum age for eligibility is often prescribed.