Allahabad High Court Judgement

Allahabad High Court Judgement

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice at mail@myadvocates.club
JUDGEMENT HEADLINE : Plea Of Juvenile Cannot Be Refused On The Ground Of Delay.
JUDGEMENT TITLE : Ram Babu Vs. State Of U.P. & Another. On 06/09/2006 By Allahabad High Court
CASE NO : APPLICATION U/S 482 NO. 5522 OF 2006
CORAM : Hon'ble Yatindra Singh,J. And Hon'ble Raghunath Kishore Rastogi,J.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

Court No.10

Criminal Misc. Application No.5522 Of 2006

Ram Babu Vs. State Of U.P. And Another.


Hon'ble R.K.Rastogi,J

This Is An Application For Quashing The Order Dated 26.4.2006 Passed By The Addl. District And Sessions Judge FTC Court No.22, Allahabad In S.T. No. 517 Of 2004 State Vs. Ram Abhilash And Another
The Facts Relevant For Disposal Of This Application Are That The Applicant Is Accused In The Aforesaid Sessions Trial Under Section 302 I.P.C. . The Prosecution Evidence Appears To Have Been Concluded Before The Trial Court . After Completion Of That Evidence The Accused Applicant Ram Babu Moved An Application Before The Trial Court For Declaring That He Was Juvenile On The Date Of The Incident And So His Case Should Be Separated From Other Accused And Should Be Sent To The Juvenile Justice Board. The Above Application Was Rejected By The Learned Addl. Sessions Judge Vide Order Dated 26.4.06. Aggrieved With That Order The Applicant Has Filed This Application Under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
I Have Heard The Learned Counsel For The Applicant And The Learned A.G.A. For The State . None Appeared On Behalf Of The Opposite Partyno.2 In Spite Of Service Of Notice.
I Have Gone Through The Order Passed By The Learned Addl. Sessions Judge . He Had Rejected The Application On The Ground That This Plea Was Not Taken At The Initial Stage And It Was Taken After Conclusion Of The Entire Evidence And So There Was No Justification For Moving This Application At That Stage.
The Applicant Has Filed A Copy Of The Mark Sheet Of High School Examination In Which His Date Of Birth Has Been Shown To Be 10.5.1988. The Date Of Incident Is 6.4.2002. The Applicant Has Alleged That He Was Juvenile On The Date Of Incident.
Considering The Submissions Of Both The Parties, I Am Of The View That The Application Of The Applicant Could Not Be Rejected Solely On The Ground That It Was Moved At The Belated Stage After Conclusion Of Evidence. Such A Plea Can Be Entertained Even At The Stage Of Appeal As Laid Down By Hon'ble Supreme Court In The Case Of Bhola Bhagat And Others Vs. State Of Bihar: 1997 (35) 835. Thus The Order Passed By The Learned Addl. Sessions Judge Can Not Be Maintained And Is Liable To Be Set Aside.
Under The Juvenile Justice ( Care And Protection Of Children) Act,2000( Called As ' Act') The Question Regarding Juvenileship Of A Person Is To Be Determined By A Juvenile Justice Board Under Section 14 Of The Act . The Procedure As To How The Dispute Regarding Juvenileship Of A Person Is To Be Determined Has Been Enumerated In Rule 22 Of U.P. Juvenile Justice ( Care And Protection Of Children) Rules, 2004 ( Called As ' Rules'). Prior To Enforcement Of These Rules , The Model Rules Framed By The Central Government Under The Act Were Applicable. Sub Rule (5) Of The Above Rule 22 Runs As Under:
"(5) In Every Case Concerning A Juvenile Or Child, The Board Shall Either Obtain:

(i) A Birth Certificate Given By A Corporation Or A Municipal Authority ; Or
(ii) A Date Of Birth Certificate From The School First Attended ; Or
(iii) Matriculation Or Equivalent Certificates, If Available ; And
(iv) In The Absence Of (i) To (iii) Above, The Medical Opinion By A Duly Constituted Medical Board, Subject To A Margin Of One Year, In Deserving Cases For The Reasons To Be Recorded By Such Medical Board, Regarding His Age; And , When Passing Orders In Such Case Shall, After Taking Into Consideration Such Evidence As May Be Available Or The Medical Opinion, As The Case May Be, Record A Finding In Respect Of His Age."
The Juvenile Justice Board Shall Determine The Juvenileship Of The Applicant In Accordance With The Provision Of The Above Rule.
Accordingly, The Order Dated 26.4.2006 Passed By The Addl. District And Sessions Judge FTC Court No.22, Allahabad In S.T. No. 517 Of 2004 State Vs. Ram Abhilash And Another Is Set Aside . The Matter Is Remanded Back To The Juvenile Justice Board, Allahabad For Determining The Juvenileship Of The Applicant With A Direction That The Board Shall, After Providing Opportunity To The Parties To Produce Additional Evidence, If Any, On The Matter Of Age Of The Applicant, Decide The Question Of Age Of Juvenileship Of The Applicant In Accordance With Sub Rule (5) Of Rule 22 Referred To Above.
The Proceedings Of S.T. No. 517 Of 2004 State Vs. Ram Abhilash And Another Pending Before Addl. District And Sessions Judge FTC Court No.22, Allahabad Shall Remain Stayed Against The Applicant Till The Finding On The Point Is Recorded By The Juvenile Justice Board. The Matter Shall Proceed Further In Accordance With Law After The Finding Of Juvenile Justice Board.
The Application Under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Is Partly Allowed Subject To The Above Directions.
Copies Of This Order Shall Be Sent To The Addl. District & Sessions Court No.22, Allahabad And To The Juvenile Justice Board, Allahabad By The Registry For Compliance. A Copy Of This Order Shall Also Be Issued To The Accused Applicant Free Of Cost Who Shall Alongwith That Copy Appear Before The Juvenile Justice Board , Allahabad On 11.10.2006.

Go to Navigation