MOHD. SALMAN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Accused Mohammad Salman has preferred this Revision Petition against the order dtd. 15/4/2014 passed by the District and Sessions Judge, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur in Criminal Appeal No.252/2014, whereby learned District and Sessions Judge set aside the order dtd. 12/3/2014 passed by the learned Juvenile Justice Board, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur in Criminal Miscellaneous Case No.23/2013 in FIR No.119/2008, Police Station, Kotwali, Jaipur, by which petitioner was held juvenile on the basis of his school certificate.

(2.) Succinctly stated the facts of the case are that Jaipur Bomb Blast took place on 13/5/2008, accused petitioner was arrested by A.T.S., U.P. on 5/3/2010 and was arrested in the present Sessions Case on 23/11/2010. Accused had placed before the Court below his Board Certificate, as per which he was a minor on the date of incident. The accused raised the question of juvenility before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate. The Chief Metropolitan Magistrate vide order dtd. 21/6/2011 held the accused Salman to be aged more than 18 years. The accused preferred an appeal under Sec. 52 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Actof 2000') before the learned Sessions Judge. Learned Sessions Judge vide order dtd. 17/10/2011 set aside the order dtd. 21/6/2011 and directed the accused to raise the question of juvenility before the Special Judge, Jaipur Bomb Blasts Cases. A revision petition was preferred by the State as well as accused Salman before the High Court, which was decided by the High Court on 17/5/2012. The High Court set aside the order of the Sessions Judge dtd. 17/10/2011 and remanded the case back to the Sessions Judge to decide it in accordance with law. Learned Sessions Judge thereafter vide order dtd. 11/2/2013 remanded the case back to the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate and directed the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate to decide the application under Sec. 12 of the Act of 2000 in accordance with Sec. 2(g) of the Act of 2000. The Juvenile Justice Board thereafter vide order dtd. 12/3/2014 held accused Salman to be a juvenile in conflict with law. Aggrieved by the said order, State of Rajasthan preferred a criminal appeal before the Sessions Judge. The Sessions Judge vide order dtd. 15/4/2014 set aside the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, aggrieved by which, accused Salman has preferred the present criminal revision.

(3.) It is contended by Mr. Trideep Pais, Senior Counsel appearing for accused Salman in S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No.1939 of 2017 that question of juvenility can be raised before any Court and even in an application moved under Sec. 12 of the Act of 2000 seeking bail, the Court has to come to the conclusion that the accused is a juvenile and then alone the Court can grant a bail under Sec. 12 of the Act of 2000. It is also contended that it is not necessary to move an application under Sec. 7-A of the Act of 2000 for getting the age determined, as when a child is produced before the Juvenile Justice Court, it is the paramount duty of the Juvenile Justice Board to first determine whether the child produced before the Juvenile Justice Board is a child or not. A finding arrived at by the Juvenile Justice Board after considering the entire evidence cannot be said to be faulted on technical grounds when the Juvenile Justice Board has been enacted for the benefit of a juvenile.