SANTOSH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. The applicant is the mother of the ravished girl Kr. Manisha, aged about 13-14 years. Kr. Manisha is alleged to have been raped by three persons namely Sanjeeve, Kishore & Vijay Pal, While Sanjeeve & Kishore were charge-sheeted before the Court of competent Magistrate. Vijay Pal was sent to the Children Court as he was alleged to be below 16 years of age at the time of commission of the offence. The applicant appears to have contested the age of Vijay Pal and in that behalf. She appears to have requested the Children Court to summon the age certificate from the institutions where Vijay Pal was alleged to have studied and also to get him medically examined for determination of his age by a Medical Board. The Children Court. However, declined to requisition the required certificate from the institutions and also to get Vijay Pal examined by a Board of Doctors for determining his age. The learned Children Court took the view that the age of Vijay Pal as recorded in the record of Board of Secondary Education Rajasthan, was conclusive proof.

(2.) It was submitted by the learned Counsel for the applicant that since it was a case of heinous crime having been committed against an in-nocent girl by three youths and two of the culprits were facing their trial before the Regular Court, the third one who was also major at the time of commission of the offence must have been tried by a Regular Court and in order to determine his majority, the learned Trial Court must have conducted necessary enquiry as desired by the applicant into the actual age of the accused Vijay Pal. It was further submitted that the date of birth as recorded in the School Register may be having some evidential value but the entry as made in the School record, can never be the conclusive proof of that fact and evidence in rebuttal thereof may always baled by a person who alleged to the contrary. It was, therefore, submitted that looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it should be directed by this Court in exercise of its powers under Section 482. Cr. P.C. that the evidence which the appellant wants to bring on the record regarding age of Vijay Pal should be allowed to be taken on record of the case and that the learned Children Court should get the accused examined for determination of his age by a Board of Doctors.

(3.) The learned Public Prosecutor was fair enough to state that where the date as stated by an accused and as stated by the other side, is disputed, the Court should be open to permit both the parties to adduce proper evidence on the point and the Court should of its own, also call for a report from the medical Experts in that behalf, learned Public Prosecutor further agreed in principle that in view of the gravity of the offence, such an inquiry is necessary so that the real culprits may not escape and go scot-free by taking shelter under the liberal provisions of the Children Act.