SAJAN SIDHU Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition brought under section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail, Sajan Sidhu, the petitioner is claimed by learned counsel for the petitioner to be a juvenile. Annexure P1 is placed on the file as copy of his matriculation examination certificate, which gives his date of birth as 22.4.1994. The occurrence is stated to be of 16.2.2012 and in view of the date of his birth appearing in Annexure P1, he would be less than 18 years of age on the date of occurrence.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the court of Additional Sessions Judge dealing with the application for pre-arrest bail of the petitioner did not determine the question of juvenility of the petitioner though, the said question was raised before it. He has referred me in this regard to the provisions of section 7A of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Amendment Act, 2006 (for short, "the Act") which prescribes that whenever a claim of juvenility is raised before any court, the court shall make an enquiry, take such evidence as may be necessary (but not an affidavit) so as to determine the age of such person and shall record a finding whether the person is a juvenile or not stating his age as nearly as may be.

(3.) In view of the provisions of section 7A of the Act, the question of juvenility can be decided after a due enquiry conducted in terms of the said section and for that matter, the court has to take evidence.