RUDARAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal was filed by accused-appellant Rudaram in 1991, then indicating his age to be 20 years, assailing judgment and order dated 20.11.1991 passed by the Court of District and Sessions Judge, Jaipur District, Jaipur (for short 'the trial court') whereby he was convicted for offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine he was to further undergo rigorous imprisonment of two months.

(2.) When the appeal came up for hearing before the Court on 28.07.2017, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted that as per school leaving certificate, the appellant was born on 30.06.1971 and on the date of occurrence, i.e. 21.10.1987, he was less than 18 years of age. During pendency of the appeal, Application No. 14931/2017 was filed by the appellant contending that as per Transfer Certificate issued by the Government Senior Secondary School, Ringus, District Sikar, date of birth of the appellant was 30.06.1971 and therefore, he was less than 18 years of age on the date of occurrence i.e. on 21.10.1987. It is further contended that as per Sections 2(k); 2(l) and 7-A of the Juvenile Justice (CareProtection of Children) Act, 2000 (for short 'the Act of 2000') and Rule 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007 (for short 'the Rules of 2007') read with Section 20 of the Act of 2000 as amended in year 2006, a juvenile, who had not completed eighteen years on the date of commission of the offence is also entitled to the benefits of the Act of 2000, as if the provisions of Section 2(k) had always been in existence even during the operation of the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 (for short 'the Act of 1986').

(3.) This Court vide order dated 28.07.2017 directed Juvenile Justice Board, Sikar to hold an enquiry within the ambit of Rule 12(3) of the Rules of 2007 to determine the age of the appellant Rudaram on the date of occurrence. Juvenile Justice Board was further directed to complete the enquiry within a period of three months by affording opportunity to prosecution and the accused to lead evidence for determining the age of the appellant.