The second document is another certificate issued by the Principal, Government Primary School, Purbi Paukuahwa, Block Mainatand, West Champaran, Bihar which states that the particulars of the first respondent are entered in the records of the said school and that his date of birth as mentioned in the school admission register is 28.11.1985.
However, as the Court had to be satisfied with the authenticity of the said two documents, on 27.01.2014 the following order was passed.
The date of occurrence of the offences alleged in the present case is 16.11.2006.
Challenging the aforesaid finding of the High Court, the companyplainant, who is the father of the victim of the crime, has approached this Court.
Accordingly, the first respondent was sent for medical examination by a Board.
Consequently, the learned Trial Court by order dated 24.12.2007 refused to accept the claim of juvenility raised on behalf of the first respondent.
The first respondent filed an application claiming to be a juvenile and in support thereof he had enclosed a certificate issued by the Government Primary Urdu School, Shekhawa, Basantpur, Block Mainatand wherein his date of birth was mentioned as 15.01.1991.
Aggrieved, the first respondent moved the Patna High Court.
A reply has been filed on behalf of the first respondent in the present appeal wherein reliance has, once again, been placed on the school certificate issued by the Government Urdu School Shekhwa, Basantpur, Distt.
In order to find out the age of Respondent No.1 accused on the date of occurrence, we direct the Principal, Government Primary Urdu School, Shekhawa, Basantpur, Block Mainatand, West Champaran, Bihar and Principal, Government Primary School, Purbi Paukuahwa, Block Mainatand, West Champaran, Bihar to appear alongwith the companynected original record before this Court on 24th February, 2014.
Though the report of the Board was to the effect that the first respondent was 17 years of age, the learned Trial Court took the view that the said opinion would admit the possibility of a variation of 2 years.
By order dated 14.11.2008 the High Court interfered with the order of the learned Trial Court and allowed the application of the first respondent herein declaring him to be a juvenile and to be of sixteen and a half years of age on the date of alleged occurrence.
The learned Trial Court, for reasons number very clearly stated, recorded the finding that the certificate produced by the first respondent was a forged one.
RANJAN GOGOI, J. Leave granted.
The first respondent Tunna Tunnu Mian Tunna Mian Mobin Ansari was companymitted to the Court of Sessions to face trial for offences under Sections 302/201 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code.
