The petitioner seeks to re agitate the question in this writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution urging that the trial and all the later proceedings emanating therefrom were nullities that there was a violation of petitioners fundamental right under Article 21 and that therefore the earlier proceedings are amenable to review in proceedings under Article 32.
During the trial and later in the appeal before the High Court, one of the defences raised and urged was that petitioner was a ,child within the meaning of Section 2 d of the Bihar Childrens Act and he was number liable to be tried in the ordinary way.
He claimed to be in his and number companypleted sixteenth year.
This was affirmed in appeal by the High Court.
We have heard Shri Gopal Subramaniam, learned companynsel for the petitioner.
That defence was number accepted by the Sessions Court and the High Court.
