RAJU Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Appellant stands convicted under sections 376 and 302 IPC to life imprisonment separately on both counts along with fine of Rs. 10,000/- on each count. In the event of failure to pay the fine, he was required to undergo one year further rigorous imprisonment on the default count as ordered on 19.3.1999 by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Bastar at Jagadalpur in Sessions Trial No. 199 of 1998. It is the case of the prosecution that the body of the deceased girl child aged approximately seven years was found on 15.3.1998 in an abandoned house 20-25 meters from where she resided with her parents in rented accommodation. The Appellant was the son of the landlord. The body on recovery was taken to the hospital by PW2, Bharti and PW3, Mohanlal, the parents of the deceased, where she was pronounced dead. Merg intimation was received from the hospital leading to FIR, Exhibit P13 registered by the Police on 16.3.1998 at about 12:05 pm. The postmortem of the deceased was conducted on 16.3.1998 at about 11:30 am noticing that froth was coming out of the nostrils. The eyes were popping and the mouth was open. There was strangulation mark around the neck on the level of the cartilage. The cause of death was asphyxia due to strangulation homicidal in nature confirming that she had been sexually assaulted before strangulation.

(2.) On 8.7.2014 during the pendency of the appeal, the Appellant raised an objection that he was a juvenile under 18 years of age on the date of occurrence. The Court directed an enquiry under Section 7(A) of the Juvenile Justice (Care of Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The enquiry report has been received from the Court of the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Bastar at Jagdalpur. The Appellant himself examined apart from leading evidence of his elder brother. The Sessions Judge called for the records from the Maharani Hospital, Jagdalpur, where the Appellant and his brother claimed he had been born on 24.5.1982 and also from the Revenue Officer, Jagdalpur Municipal Corporation. No entries with regard to the Appellant or name of his parents was found in the hospital records and none was found in the birth and death register of the Corporation. As the Appellant stated that he had never gone to school and he possessed no other documentary evidence regarding his age, the Sessions Judge ordered bone ossification test by the medical board under Rule 12(3)(b) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007(hereinafter called 'the Rules'). The medical report opines that on the basis of his present estimated age of 35-40 years, he was approximately 19 or above years of age on the date of occurrence, i.e. 15.3.1998.

(3.) In Abuzar Hossain Alias Gulam Hossain v. State of West Bengal, 2012 10 SCC 489 it has been held that a concession of one year could be given in cases of such assessment of age. That leaves the Appellant as 18 or above years of age on the date of occurrence. The plea of juvenility is therefore not available to him as under Section 2(k) of the Act to claim juvenility the person must not have completed 18 years of age. The plea of juvenility is therefore rejected.