He was aged about 20 years.
40 under Section 302/201 of the Indian Penal Code was separately registered.
Appellant before us is the first informant, the father of a boy, Parkash Chadha Sunny who was kidnapped for ransom and later on murdered.
The learned Sessions Judge was number satisfied therewith.
In these circumstances, the impugned order is set aside and the learned Additional Sessions Judge is directed to companysider the matter afresh and if it appears to the learned Additional Sessions Judge that the petitioner is a Juvenile on the basis of the material on records, he is required to be sent to the Juvenile Justice Board for further proceedings.
On or about 19th January, 2003, Respondent No.1 was suspected of involvement in the said crime by the police.
According to the expert the petitioner was 22 25 years on the date of his examination i.e. 9.8.2005.
On a revision application filed thereagainst before the High Court, it by an order dated 31st August, 2006 set aside the said order and directed Anyhow, these are the matters which require a more detailed examination particularly in view of the fact that there exists a School Certificate wherein the date of birth of the petitioner has been given.
Relying on the decision of this Court in Pratap Singh v. State of Jharkhand and another, 2005 3 SCC 551 it was held From the judgments cited by the learned APP, it is clear that to ascertain the age of accused persons only School Leaving Certificate cannot be relied upon alone and the companyrt has to see all the other facts and circumstances along with the other material placed on record.
In regard to the finding out of the dead body of Parakh Chadha DD No.
The date of birth showed in the register 20.01.1985.
The report pursuant thereto reads as under Inquiry companyducted into the matter revelas that Vikas Choudhary was admitted to Class I in Lawrence School of Ashok Vihar Phase I, Delhi vide Admission NO.412.
School Leaving Certificate of the accused was verified during the proceedings and report was filed by IO wherein it has been mentioned that numberbirth certificate or other certificate is available in support of the date of the accused in the School record.
Charges were framed.
The Learned Additional Sessions Judge, trying the case, directed the Investigating Officer to submit a report.
Upon his production, the respondent No.1 did number claim himself to be a juvenile.
He was found missing after he had gone out with his friends on 18th January, 2003.
A missing report was lodged on the said date.
A charge sheet was filed on 22nd July, 2003 wherein it was recorded that calls for payment of ransom were being made from time to time and last of such call for payment of ransom was received on 11th March, 2003.
A report was submitted on 9th August, 2005.
The application for sending him to the Juvenile Court stands dismissed.
A school leaving certificate was also produced.
The Investigating Officer was directed to get the respondent No.1 medically examined for getting his age determined.
Although the first information report was lodged on 19th January, 2003, the respondent No.1 was arrested on 4th May, 2003.
He, on the basis of the investigation carried out for the said purpose charge sheeted for companymission of offence under Sections 302/364/34 of the Indian Penal Court by the Court.
The veracity of the School Certificate and Transfer Certificate submitted by the petitioner is number doubted.
Again by reason of an order dated 20th January, 2007 the learned Judge held As per School Leaving Certificate, the date of birth of the accused is 20.01.1985.
6832 of 2007 REPORTABLE B. SINHA, J. Leave granted.
The prosecution started adduction of evidence on or about 3rd February, 2005.
Arising out of SLP CRL NO.
Pursuant thereto or in furtherance thereof, the respondent was examined medically.
Only on 31st May, 2005 respondent No.1 herein filed an application for transfer of the case to the Juvenile Board on the plea that he was a juvenile on the date of occurrence.
How to determine the age of a juvenile in delinquency within the meaning of the Juvenile Justice Care and Protection of Children Act, 2000 for short the Act is in question in this appeal which arises out of a judgment and order dated 11th September, 2001 passed by a learned Single Judge of the Delhi High Court in Criminal Revision No.
156 of 2007 whereby and whereunder an order dated 20th January, 2007 passed by a learned Additional Session Judge, Delhi, was set aside.
