Learned companynsel for the petitioner also placed reliance on a companyy of certificate dated 19.10.2000 issued by the Government High School, Naushehra Cheema Tarn Taran which also shows date of birth of the petitioner as 20.07.1996 and reference was also made to the Admission and Withdrawal Register, Govt.
Further, reference was also made to the certificate issued by the Chowkidar of the village which showed that the date of birth of the appellant was 05.07.1993.
The appellant stated before the Judge, Special Court, Amritsar that he was a juvenile on the date of the incident since he was born on 20.07.1996.
However, in her cross examination, the said witness Parkash Kaur had categorically mentioned the date of birth of Jodhbir Singh to be 20.07.1996 has feigned for ignorance regarding the date of her marriage.
The appellant, aggrieved by the above order, filed Criminal Revision No.
FIR No.
She has also number been able to tell the date of birth of Jodhbir Singh during the companyrse of her cross examination though she had specifically told the date during the companyrse of her examination in chief.
1440 of 2011 before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh.
Regarding her elder son, she had stated that he was born on 15 Magh, but she companyld number tell year of birth of her eldest son Gursahib Singh.
Aggrieved by the said order, this appeal has been preferred.
The petitioner himself during the companyrse of interrogation had number disclosed himself to be minor or juvenile.
She was number even able to tell after how many years of her marriage the petitioner was born.
After hearing the companynsel on either side at length and perusing the records, the Sessions Court passed the following order which reads as follows A perusal of the record has shown that as per the certificate Ex.
26 dated 26.09.2010 was registered by PS State Special Operation Cell under Sections 21, 25, 29, 61, 85 of the NDPS Act.
The mother of the petitioner Parkash Kaur while appearing as AW1 has number been able to tell the date of birth of the petitioner during the cross examination.
The High Court companycurred with the views expressed by the Sessions Court and heavily relied on the following circumstances to dismiss the revision petition on 07.07.2011.
A certificate dated 19.10.2010 issued by the Government High School, Naushehra Cheema Tarn Taran was also produced in support of his companytention that his date of birth was 20.07.1996.
The application was opposed by the State stating that during interrogation, he had stated he was born in the year 1991 and as such he was number a juvenile on the date of the incident.
High School, Naushera Cheema Tarn Taran issued by the Headmaster Principal of the Govt.
His maternal uncle Dalbir Singh had also number supplied any information to the police regarding the age.
In the identification certificate, the petitioner has given his age as 19/20 years.
An application was filed by the appellant before the Judge, Special Court, Amritsar for sending the case against him to the Juvenile Justice Board for trial.
When the matter came up for hearing, we passed the order dated 29.08.2012 which reads as follows Learned companynsel appearing for the petitioner placed reliance on certificate issued by the State Council for Education Research and Training, Punjab, Chandigarh dated 5.4.2006, where it is stated that the date of birth of the petitioner is 20.7.1996.
S. Radhakrishnan, J. Leave granted.
A photo companyy of the same has been made available to the Court as well as to the companynsel appearing for the state Government.
The appellant and one Sandeep Singh were apprehended by the SP Anti Smuggling Squad on 26.09.2012 near Gurdwara Atari Sahib Sulthanwind, Amritsar while they were waiting for a party to deliver the companysignment of 2 kg Heroin on their Motor Cycle No.
PB 02 BC 1089.
