The only respondent impleaded therein was the Birth Death Registrar, Coimbatore City Municipal Corporation.
As required by the J.J. Act, 2000, the appellant has number produced the admission register of the school which he attended for the first time.
The Birth Death Registrar, Coimbatore City Municipal Corporation did number appear before the companyrt.
Inspector of Police, Coimbatore City, ought to have been made a party to the application and it should have been informed to the companyrt that the documents were to be submitted in the Supreme Court, but that was number done.
Accordingly, his father filed a petition under the said Act and the Judicial Magistrate, after making enquiry, verified the date of birth of the appellant.
Verification certificate dated 31/12/2013 issued by the present Head Master Mr. A. Francis Clement Vimal establishes that he verified and companypared the available school records and companycluded that the alleged admission No.526 is related to S. Dinakaran s o. Sreedharan, who is some other student of the institution and certainly number the appellant.
The appellant along with the other 2 accused preferred an appeal to the High Court.
Certain documents which were number genuine were filed along with it for a declaration that date of birth of the appellant was 23/5/1980.
Thus, the appellant is relying on the school certificate issued by the Good Shephered Primary School, Fort, Coimbatore and the birth certificate issued by the Coimbatore City Municipal Corporation.
Jesudas had retired as Head Master as early as on 31/5/2010.
K. Abdul Razak s o. Late Sulaiman filed CMP No.57 of 2013 in the companyrt of Judicial Magistrate, Coimbatore stating that he was father of A. Ibrahim, the appellant.
These documents on which the appellant has placed reliance are annexed to the affidavit and have thus companye on record.
The appellant along with others was tried by the IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Coimbatore for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code the IPC .
It is stated that the investigation is in progress.
It appears that as directed by the Judicial Magistrate, the Coimbatore City Municipal Corporation has issued birth certificate to the appellant showing his date of birth as 23/5/1980.
The present Head Master of the school has filed companyplaint at B 12, Ukkadam Police Station, Coimbatore City that somebody has issued a forged record sheet in favour of A. Ibrahim s o. Abdul Razak purporting to have been issued by the Head Master of the said school and Crime No.1722 of 2013 is registered under Sections 467, 471 and 420 of the IPC on 31/12/2013.
Copies of the companyplaint filed by the present Head Master, the FIR registered on the basis thereof are also annexed to the companynter affidavit.
The respondent has verified the school admission register maintained at Good Shepherd Primary School and found that numbersuch student by name A. Ibrahim s o. Abdul Razak studied in that school, at all.
It is further stated that the appellants father was advised to obtain birth certificate from the Judicial Magistrate, Coimbatore as per the provisions of Section 13 3 of the Birth and Death Registration Act, 1969.
The Head Master further stated that the certificate has been signed by one Jesudas as the Head Master on 15/11/2011, but numbersuch person by name Jesudas was the Head Master of the school as on 15/11/2011.
Vide order dated 1/2/2013, the Judicial Magistrate directed the Coimbatore City Municipal Corporation to register the birth of the appellant in the Birth Register as 23/5/1980.
It is further stated that the mother of the appellant died in the year 1997.
Along with the criminal appeal, the appellant has filed an application praying that he may be permitted to urge additional grounds and bring on record additional documents.
The Sessions Court companyvicted the appellant and 2 others for offence punishable under Section 148 of the IPC and sentenced them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year each and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/ each, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month each.
The gist of the affidavit is as under When the appellant surrendered before Judicial Magistrate, Udumalpet on 18/9/1997, in the Surrender Petition, he gave his age as 20 years.
The enquiry made by the respondent reveals that numberrecord sheet was ever issued by the Head Master of the school and, hence, it is a forged document.
In this affidavit, it is stated that the appellant, with companynivance of his father Mr. Abdul Razak, companyspired and obtained fake record sheet and produced the same before the companyrt and obtained Birth Certificate showing appellants birth date as 23/5/1980 by practicing fraud to portray him as a juvenile.
The appellant has number produced matriculation or equivalent certificate or date of birth certificate from the school first attended by him as per Rule 12 of the said Rules.
In the Form of Remand Warrant dated 18/9/1997 issued by learned Magistrate, the appellants age is mentioned as 20 years as per the Descriptive Roll.
The High Court numbered that numberapplication was filed before the High Court seeking permission to adduce evidence to establish that the appellant was a juvenile.
He prayed for an order directing the Municipal Corporation to register the birth of the appellant in the Birth Register.
The appellant has produced record sheet issued by Good Shepherd Primary School, Fort, Coimbatore dated 15/11/2011.
These documents were number proved in accordance with the procedures known to law.
The appellant and his brother were living on their own.
Since there was numberody to help the appellant, numbersteps were taken to bring the age of the appellant to the numberice of the trial companyrt as well as the High Court.
The record sheet is, therefore, forged.
It was for the first time raised in the High Court while the appeal was being argued.
RANJANA PRAKASH DESAI, J. Leave granted.
Since the appellant was in jail, numbersteps were taken to obtain documents regarding his date of birth.
Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent by R. Srinivasalu s o. N. Ramachandran, presently working as Inspector of Police, B 12, Ukkadam Police Station, Coimbatore City, Tamil Nadu.
It is further stated that during the year 2011, the appellants father came back to him and enquired about the case in which the appellant is companyvicted.
The respondent had filed a requisition to the Head Master to make enquiry and find out whether the record sheet filed by the appellant before this Court dated 15/11/2011 was issued by the Head Master of that school.
It was only during the argument before the High Court that this plea was raised.
By the impugned judgment and order, the High Court dismissed the said appeal.
Then he took steps to obtain school certificate from the Good Shephered Primary School, Fort, Coimbatore where the appellant had studied.
Being aggrieved by the dismissal of the appeal, the appellant has approached this Court.
After the death of his mother, his father had remarried and left the appellant and his brother alone.
The High Court has numbered in the impugned judgment that the plea of juvenility was neither raised before the trial companyrt, number raised in the memo of appeal before the High Court.
In the application, it is admitted that in the High Court without filing necessary documents, the plea of juvenility was raised and it was rejected by the High Court.
In this special leave petition, judgment and order dated 15/10/2004 passed by the Madras High Court in Criminal Appeal No.963 of 2001 is under challenge.
This petition was filed under Section 13 3 of the Birth Death Registration Act, 1969.
In the petition, there is numberchallenge to the companyviction and sentence on merits.
It is number mentioned whether the companyrt summons was served on the Birth Death Registrar.
The appellant was tried for murder in the instant case.
Verification report of the present Head Master is annexed to the companynter affidavit.
Form of Remand warrant is annexed to the affidavit.
The Magistrates order states that five documents were produced by the appellants side and they were marked.
The Head Master gave a written reply to the respondent that he had been working in the said school from 1/6/2010 onwards and that the said record sheet produced by the appellant was number issued by the school.
The order passed by the Judicial Magistrate shows that it was an ex parte order.
In the Memo of Appearance filed by the appellants companynsel at that stage, his age is mentioned as 20 years.
