SOFIKUL ISLAM Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this bail application under sec. 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, petitioner laments that he is only 16 years of age and hence he ought to be treated only as a child in conflict with law and could not have even been arrested. Petitioner claims that he should be released on bail forthwith. The contentions bring to the fore questions on the method to be adopted when the age is in dispute.

(2.) Petitioner, who stands indicted for the offences under Sec. 366A, 376 and 376(1) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, apart from Sec. 3(a) and 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012, alleges that he is only 16 years in age. The main contention urged is that under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (for short 'the JJ Act of 2015 '), petitioner is liable to be treated as a child and therefore, he could not have been arrested.

(3.) Sri.Vishnu Babu and Adv. Aswini Sankar, learned counsel for the petitioner, vehemently contended that as per the Aadhaar card, petitioner's date of birth is 2/1/2006 and therefore, he is required to be treated only as a child in conflict with the law. It was also submitted that the date of birth certificate issued by the Department of Health Services, State of Assam, also shows his date of birth as that on the Aadhar card. Ignoring those crucial documents, the investigating officer is alleged to have arrested the petitioner on 3/6/2022, and he has been in custody since then, contended the learned counsel.