MUKHWINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mukhwinder Singh, petitioner, along with others was convicted by Shri H. S. Bakshi, the then Additional Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur on 25-10-1980 (Annexure R/1) for the murder of three persons. The learned Sessions Judge awarded various punishments vide his detailed order dated 27-10-1980 including the one for life imprisonment on three counts regarding the murder of three persons. While awarding the sentence the trial Court refuted the contention of the counsel for Mukhwinder Singh, accused, that he was less than 16 years old at the time of the commission of the offence by observing that apparently it appears that the accused had given less age by a couple of years. The above referred order of sentence and conviction of the Ld. Sessions Judge was confirmed by the High Court as well as by the Supreme Court.

(2.) The petitioner then filed Criminal Writ Petition No. 123 of 1989 under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India and under Section 6 of the East Punjab Children Act, 1949 (for short the Children Act) praying that the case be referred to the State Government under Section 34 of the Children Act for quantifying sentence. This petition was disposed of by S.D. Bajaj, J. on 13-7-1989 by passing an order, which reads as under:

(3.) The petitioner thereafter filed the present petition inter alia contending that the age given by the prisoner in his statement recorded under Section 313 of the Code by the trial Court is to be taken as gospel truth unless the trial Court had examined some medical expert or got subjected the petitioner to ossification test for determining the bone age and that the observation of the trial Court that the petitioner might be above the age of 16 years of age, being based on mere surmises and conjectures, is of no consequence. It is further maintained that Secretary, Social and Welfare Department, had no jurisdiction to re- open the issue of the age of the prisoner at the time of the commission of the offence after the decision of this Court in Criminal Writ Petition No. 123 of 1989 wherein the written statement filed by the State (Annexure P. 2) it has been admitted that the age of the petitioner was recorded as 16 years at the time of conviction as mentioned in the conviction order besides admitting that the prisoner had given his age as 16 years at the time of recording his statement under Section 313 of the Code on 24-10-1980.