SHIBU KUMAR YADAV Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsels for the parties.

(2.) This criminal revision application is directed against the order dtd. 8/3/2022 Passed in S.T. Case No. 71 of 2020 arising out of Bagbera P.S. Case No. 97 of 2019 registered under Sec. -395 I.P.C. whereby and where under the learned court below has rejected the application of the petitioner for declaring him juvenile though he was aged about 17 Years and 4 Months at the time of occurrence on 12/8/2019 as per his School Admission Register.

(3.) It has further been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is accused in connection with Bagbera P.S. Case No. 97 of 2019 (ST Case No. 71/2020) registered u/s 395 of IPC and he has been facing trial after framing of the charge. Further it has been submitted that this petitioner made an application before the learned court below for declaring him juvenile in ST Case No. 71/2020 on the basis of school certificate. It has been pointed out that during the court inquiry in order to determine the age of the petitioner on the date of occurrence for declaring him juvenile the learned court below had called the school admission register in question along with the competent person from the school management to adduce the evidence on the point of the age. Accordingly the school clerk was examined before the learned court below during the course of enquiry and the School Admission Register was marked as Ext. 1 in which the date of birth of the petitioner was mentioned as 10/4/2002. But the learned court below has ignored the entire facts and passed the impugned order dtd. 8/3/2022 totally discarding the evidence adduced by the school clerk along with the documentary evidence i.e. the School Admission Register of the school in which it was admitted i.e. in the admission register the date of birth of the petitioner has been written as 10/4/2002 which clearly establishes the facts that the petitioner was admitted in school on 10/4/2013 in class VI where the date of birth has been mentioned as 10/4/2002 but without assigning any rational reason, the learned court below rejected the prayer of the petitioner to declare him juvenile on the ground that no documents has been produced by the petitioner about his age proof of Class I or what was the basis of indicating the age of petitioners as 10/4/2022 in the school admission register which is bad in law and fit to be set aside.