- (1.) Delay condoned. Leave granted. 1.The only submission advanced at the hands of the Learned Counsel for the Appellant during the course of hearing was, that the Appellant was a juvenile on the date of occurrence. In order to establish juvenility, the Appellant has relied on a School Leave Certificate dated 18.09.2014. To support his contention, that on the basis of the aforesaid School Leaving Certificate, the Appellant should be treated as a juvenile on the date of occurrence, and should be given the benefit of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, Learned Counsel has placed reliance on a decision rendered by this Court in Ranjeet Goswami v. State of Jharkhand and Anr., 2013 4 RCR(Cri) 369. Our attention has been invited to the following observations recorded therein: "9. We, therefore, find no reason to reject the school leaving certificate. If that be so, as per the ratio laid down in Ashwani Kumar Saxena v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2012 4 RCR(Cri) 391 there is no question of subjecting the accused to a medical examination by a Medical Board. Going by the school leaving certificate since the Appellant was a juvenile on the date of occurrence, he can be tried only by the JJ Board. Consequently, the order passed by the High Court is set aside and that of the Sessions Judge, Dumka is restored. The appeal is allowed, as stated above."
(2.) We have given our thoughtful consideration to the solitary contention advanced at the hands of the Learned Counsel for the Appellant. The issue of juvenility under the provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 has to be determined under Rule 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007. Rule 12 of the aforesaid rules is being extracted hereunder: "12. Procedure to be followed in determination of Age. - (1) In every case concerning a child or a juvenile in conflict with law, the court or the Board or as the case may be the Committee referred to in Rule 19 of these rules shall determine the age of such juvenile or child or a juvenile in conflict with law within a period of thirty days from the date of making of the application for that purpose. (2) The court or the Board or as the case may be the Committee shall decide the juvenility or otherwise of the juvenile or the child or as the case may be the juvenile in conflict with law, prima facie on the basis of physical appearance or documents, if available, and send him to the observation home or in jail. (3) In every case concerning a child or juvenile in conflict with law, the age determination inquiry shall be conducted by the court or the Board or, as the case may be, the Committee by seeking evidence by obtaining - (a)(i) the matriculation or equivalent certificates, if available; and in the absence whereof; (ii) the date of birth certificate from the school (other than a play school) first attended; and in the absence whereof; (iii) the birth certificate given by a corporation or a municipal authority or a panchayat; (b) and only in the absence of either (i), (ii) or (iii) of Clause (a) above, the medical opinion will be sought from a duly constituted Medical Board, which will declare the age of the juvenile or child. In case exact assessment of the age cannot be done, the Court or the Board or, as the case may be, the Committee, for the reasons to be recorded by them, may, if considered necessary, give benefit to the child or juvenile by considering his/her age on lower side within the margin of one year. and, while passing orders in such case shall, after taking into consideration such evidence as may be available, or the medical opinion, as the case may be, record a finding in respect of his age and either of the evidence specified in any of the Clauses (a)(i), (ii), (iii) or in the absence whereof, Clause (b) shall be the conclusive proof of the age as regards such child or the juvenile in conflict with law. (4) If the age of a juvenile or child or the juvenile in conflict with law is found to be below 18 years on the date of offence, on the basis of any of the conclusive proof specified in Sub-rule (3), the court or the Board or as the case may be the Committee shall in writing pass an order stating the age and declaring the status of juvenility or otherwise, for the purpose of the Act and these rules and a copy of the order shall be given to such juvenile or the person concerned. (5) Save and except where, further inquiry or otherwise is required, inter alia, in terms of Section 7A, Section 64 of the Act and these rules, no further inquiry shall be conducted by the court or the Board after examining and obtaining the certificate or any other documentary proof referred to in Sub-rule (3) of this rule. (6) The provisions contained in this rule shall also apply to those disposed off cases, where the status of juvenility has not been determined in accordance with the provisions contained in Sub-rule (3) and the Act, requiring dispensation of the sentence under the Act for passing appropriate order in the interest of the juvenile in conflict with law."
(3.) Having given our thoughtful consideration to the submission advanced at the hands of the Learned Counsel for the Appellant, we are satisfied, that a school leaving certificate is not a relevant consideration to determine the juvenility of an accused/convict Under Rule 12(3) thereof. The afore-mentioned statutory provision was not considered by this Court while deciding Ranjeet Goswami's case . The same cannot therefore be any precedential value in terms of the statutory provisions, referred to here in above. For the reasons recorded here in above, we find no merit in this appeal. The same is accordingly hereby dismissed.;