MANJU SEXANA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this criminal revision application challenging the order dated 23.7.2012 passed by the Additional Judicial Commissioner XX, Ranchi in Sessions Trial No.81 of 2005.

(2.) The petitioner is the informant of the case and has challenged the impugned order on the ground that the accused is not a juvenile and thus the order of the Additional Judicial Commissioner treating him a juvenile and separating the record from remaining accused persons is illegal.

(3.) The petitioner further submits that on the fact of the case the accused namely, Sikandra Baitha @ Sachindra Baitha @ Satyendra Kumar Rajak son of Ram Kishun Baitha cannot be treated to be juvenile and should be tried with the other accused.