GURBAJ SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) In the present petition order dated 02.04.2012 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/1st FTC, Rudrapur, Udham Singh Nagar is under challenge whereby learned trial court was pleased to reject the application (paper no. 236Kha) moved by the petitioner claiming himself to be juvenile on the date of incident.
(2.) Brief facts of the present case, inter alia, are that FIR (case crime no. 172 of 2005) was got registered against unknown persons with police station Bajpur, District Udham Singh Nagar on 14.02.2005 under Section 364 IPC stating therein that 4 miscreants came on two motorcycles and stopped the school bus forcibly and abducted one student Gurvinder Singh, son of Lakhvinder Singh; a message was flashed on the wireless set to all the police stations; meanwhile, petitioner, herein, was arrested at Gaddapu Police Barrier, police station Kaladungi, District Nainital and from the possession of petitioner, one 12 bore country made pistol and one live cartridge were recovered. For recovery of country made pistol from the possession of the petitioner, another case crime no. 173 of 2005 under Section 25 of the Arms Act was got registered at police station Kaladungi, District Nainital. Petitioner, herein, moved an application before the competent court at Nainital claiming that on the date of incident, he was juvenile, therefore, as per provisions of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act (for short "the J.J. Act") he was entitled for the benefit and could not be tried before the regular court. On the application of the petitioner, herein, Juvenile Justice Board, Nainital held an inquiry, as contemplated under Section 7A read with Rule 12 of the J.J. Act.
(3.) Vide order dated 22.04.2005 Juvenile Justice Board, Nainital held that actual date of birth of the petitioner was 05.03.1988, as per school leaving certificate produced before the Board. Therefore, petitioner was only 17 year 3 month of age, on the date of incident i.e. 14.02.2005. Meanwhile, a chargesheet was submitted against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 364 IPC before the competent court at Udham Singh Nagar and after committal of the case to the court of Session, Sessions Trial No. 122 of 2005 commenced wherein petitioner again took a plea that as per his date of birth, he was juvenile on the date of incident, therefore, he could not be tried by the regular court. Order passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Nainital was also produced before the trial court along with the application, however, learned trial court held that order passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Nainital in connected case, had no binding effect on the trial court at Udham Singh Nagar. It has further been observed by the trial court that school leaving certificate produced from the side of petitioner did not inspire confidence and referred the petitioner for medical opinion. As per medical opinion furnished by Radiologist, Haldwani, petitioner was opined above 18-year of age on 06.10.2005 (Annexure No. 9 to the petition).;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.