MURSHID ANSARI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision application is directed against the order dated 17.10.2012 passed by the learned District & Additional Sessions Judge - Vth, Ranchi in Cr. Appeal No.159 of 2012 preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 27.06.2012 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi, whereby the petitioner's plea of juvenility has been rejected.

(2.) Learned counsel, for the petitioner, has submitted that the date of occurrence is 05.08.2009. The petitioner had voluntarily surrendered before the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi on 11.08.2009. On completion of investigation, the police on 31.08.2009 submitted charge-sheet under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner. Thereafter the petitioner filed the application under Section 7A of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (in short J.J. Act) for declaring him to be a juvenile. In support of the claim of juvenility the petitioner had produced the Admit card of the annual examination conducted by the Jharkhand Academic Council (for short JAC), Ranchi of the year 2007, along with the mark-sheet, provisional certificate and character certificate wherein the date of birth of the petitioner is mentioned as 29.12.1991. That the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi during enquiry, got the documents verified by the Probation Officer, Ranchi and on being satisfied about the genuinity of the documents, declared the petitioner to be a juvenile by order dated 19.11.2009 and transferred the case of the petitioner to the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Ranchi. Where after since the petitioner was a juvenile, he was enlarged on bail by order dated 08.01.2010.

(3.) Learned counsel, for informant/O.P. No.02, while refuting the contents of learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that, it is not disputed that the petitioner had initially produced the certificate of the Board Examination of JAC of the year 2007 showing the date of birth as 29.12.1991 but the informant/O.P. No.02 came to know that the petitioner had earlier appeared for Fauqania Examination in 2006, which was conducted by the Jharkhand Academic Council. That JAC had issued the certificate of 2006 wherein the date of birth of this petitioner has been as mentioned as 10.01.1991. It is contended by the learned counsel that the decision in the case of Ashwani Kumar Saxena relied on by the learned counsel for the petitioner can be applicable in a matter when there is no dispute regarding the genuinity of the documents mentioning the date of birth. It is contended that in the case at hand, two certificates of JAC are available mentioning varying date of birth. In one of the certificates, i.e., of 2006, the date of birth of the petitioner is mentioned as 10.01.1991 whereas, in the other, i.e., of 2007, the date of birth is mentioned as 29.12.1991.