PRAKASH KUMAR SHARMA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.

(2.) PETITIONER is aggrieved by the order dated 21.9.2011 passed by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge -II, Dhanbad in Sessions Trial No.249 of 2008, whereby, the claim of the petitioner that he was juvenile on the date of the occurrence, was rejected by the Court below.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned order passed by the Court below cannot be sustained in the eyes of law. It has been further submitted that as per the rules prescribed, the petitioner was also entitled to the benefit by considering his age on the lower side within the margin of one year and if the margin of one year is given, the petitioner shall become juvenile on the date of the occurrence i.e. on 24.2.2008. Learned counsel accordingly, submitted that the impugned order cannot be sustained in the eyes of law.