BALWANT SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
STATE OF UTTARANCHAL
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) THE present appeal, which has three appellants Balwant Singh, Birendra Singh and Smt. Saruli Devi, is preferred against
the conviction and sentence passed against them in Sessions
Trial No.4 of 1997, State Vs. Balwant Singh and others, whereby
all of them have been convicted under Section 302 r/w Section
34 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life along with fine of Rs.1,000/- each and in default of the payment of
fine, to undergo three months' additional rigorous imprisonment.
(2.) OUT of these three appellants before this Court, the claim of juvenility was raised by appellant no.2 Birendra Singh on
14.5.2012. In view of the provisions contained under Section 7(A) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act'), this Court permitted the said appellant to produce evidence in support of his claim
and the matter was adjourned. On 19.5.2012, an application
was filed along with an affidavit, stating that as per the 'family
register' of the village, being kept by Gram Vikas Panchayat
Adhikari, Dhoktigaon, Tehsil Kapkot, District Bageshwar, the
actual date of birth of accused Birendra Singh is 07.09.1979 and
thus, he claimed the benefit of juvenility. In order to confirm the
veracity of the document filed before this Court, on 21.5.2012,
we summoned the concerned 'Gram Vikas Panchayat Adhikari'
who had his jurisdiction on the said village 'Dhoktigaon' district
Bageshwar. In compliance, Mr. Suresh Chandra Kandpal, Gram
Vikas Panchayat Adhikari of the said village was present before
this Court along with the register on 18.6.2012. All the same,
the said 'family register' appeared to be fresh, which created
some doubt in the mind of the Court. The new register was kept
in the safe custody of the Court in a sealed cover and the
concerned officer was directed by this Court to produce the old
'family register' from which the records were copied in the new
register. On 25.6.2012, the concerned officer Sri Kandpal was
present in the Court along with the old family register. It is
pertinent to mention here that a 'family register' is a record of a
family in a village Panchayat area where the records of death
and birth, apart from other details are kept. When the old as
well as the new registers were compared, it was found that in the
new 'family register', the name of head of family is Paanuli Devi,
who has been shown as wife of one Ummed Singh, whereas
Birendra Singh (appellant no.2) has been shown as son of
Paanuli Devi; likewise, Hira Devi has been shown as wife of
Birendra Singh, while Km. Deepa, Km. Gayatri, Himanshu and
Krishna have been shown as children of accused Birendra
Singh. In all, there are seven members in the family. Now, in
the old family register, 'Paanuli Devi', widow of Ummed Singh, is
shown as head of family, whereas Birendra Singh and Smt.
Heera Devi have been shown as her son and daughter-in-law.
The fact with which we are concerned is that in the old as well
as in the new registers, the date of birth of accused Birendra
Singh is shown as 07.09.1974.
Registry is directed to make photocopies of relevant entries of both the registers and mark them as Ex.'A' and 'B'
respectively. These entries shall be kept with the records of the
present appeal. After making photostat of the relevant
document, the same shall be handed over to the concerned
officer who shall keep the same in his safe custody.
(3.) IT is relevant to mention here that as per Annexure No.SA1 to the affidavit filed by appellant no.2, his date of birth is
07.09.1979. Registry is further directed to mark the application along with the annexure, i.e. the copy of family register, as
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.