SUSHIL KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant revision petition has been filed challenging the order dated 7.4.2012 whereby an application moved by the petitioner Sushil Kumar to declare him a juvenile has been declined by the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Panipat. The contention raised by Learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the date of birth of the petitioner is 21.12.1992 and the same has been described in the Middle Standard Examination certificate issued by the Board of School Education, Haryana on March 29, 2006 (Annexure P-1).

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that an FIR No. 393 dated 27.7.2010 under Sections 148, 149, 323, 324, 326 /506 IPC was registered against the petitioner and other co-accused. The petitioner filed an application through his mother in the trial court that he is a juvenile, which was dismissed by the trial court vide order dated 26.2.2011. Aggrieved against that order, he preferred an appeal before learned Additional Sessions Judge, Panipat which too has been dismissed vide order dated 7.4.2012. Hence this petition.

(3.) The only contention raised by learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is a juvenile; his date of birth is 21.12.1992 as described in Annexure P-1, the certificate of Middle Stand Examination issued by the Board of School education, Haryana. In view of this, learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that as per Rule 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007 (in short the Rules), the certificate issued by the school or specifically when it is issued by a Education Board with regard to matriculation examination is admissible as per Rule 12(3)(a)(i). Rule 12(3)(a)(i) stipulates that the matriculation or equivalent certificate, if available and in the absence whereof; (ii) the date of birth certificate from the school (other than a play school) first attended; and in the absence whereof; (iii) the birth certificate given by a corporation or a municipal authority or a Panchayat, shall be taken into consideration in every case concerning a child or juvenile in conflict with law, the age inquiry shall be conducted by the court or the Board or the committee by seeking evidence and obtaining the same. In the case of a juvenile, the Principal Magistrate is required to make an inquiry and submit report regarding that. In this case, however, no inquiry was conducted by. the Juvenile Justice Board, rather the Chief Judicial Magistrate declined the application by appreciating the evidence on its own record.