TINKU ALIAS GOPAL REVISIONST Vs. STATE OF U P
LAWS(ALL)-2004-12-96
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on December 17,2004

TINKU ALIAS GOPAL Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) Heard Sri Manish Tiwary, learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri O. P. Dubey, Advocate, for the complainant and the learned A.G.A. for the opposite party.
(2.) This criminal revision has been directed against the order dated 3-6-2003 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 25 (Fast Track) Allahabad, whereby his petition for his declaration as juvenile under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, (for short the 'Act') on the date of incident was dismissed.
(3.) A perusal of the impugned order dated 3-6-2003 of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge shows that mainly relying upon the case law of Ramdeo Chauhan alias Raj Nath v. State of Assam, 2001 SCC (Cri) 915 : (2001 Cri LJ 2902 : AIR 2001 SC 2231) the Court below has recorded its finding about the fact that the revisinoist-accused on the date of incident in the year 2001 was not juvenile. From the side of the accused, the evidence which had been given in support of his contention that he was a juvenile below 18 years of age on the date of incident is the copies of his certificate of Maharshi Balmiki Inter College, mark-sheet of Class-8 of Saraswati Prabodh Pariksha issued by the Principal, Saraswati Vidya Mandir and the mark-sheet of High School Examination by Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad duly attested by the Principal of Maharshi Balmiki Inter College. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge has rejected all these certificates and mark-sheets, which depict the applicant's date of birth being 7th October, 1984, by making a passing observation that since the Photostat copy of these mark-sheets and school leaving certificates had been filed, he did not rely upon it as a conclusive and definite proof of the date oi birth of the said accused. The Court below has also observed that since the applicant had not claimed himself to be juvenile at the time of his arrest or at the time of his petition before the Magistrate or at the time of moving the bail application, there was no justification of accepting his such plea at that stage of the case.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.