PRABHAT CHANDRA TRIPATHI,J. - (1.) Counter affidavit filed today on behalf of opposite party no.2, is taken on record. Heard Sri V.S. Parmar, learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The present criminal revision has been preferred against the order dated 31.05.2014 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.3, Meerut in Criminal Appeal No.02 of 2014, Sachin (Minor) v. State of U.P. and another and order dated 16.12.2013 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Meerut in Case No. 250 of 2013 (State v. Sachin) arising out of case crime No.449 of 2013 under Sections 302, 307 and 504 I.P.C., Police Station-Sardhana, District-Meerut, by which the application moved by revisionist for declaration of his juvenility was rejected by the learned Trial Court.
(2.) While discussing the matter in hand, the juvenility of the applicant-Sachin, the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Meerut in Misc. Case No. 250 of 2013 has mentioned that in the High School Examination, 2012, certificate-cum-mark sheet of Sachin Kumar, his date of birth has been mentioned as 12th October, 1995. It has also been mentioned in the order dated 16.12.2013 passed by the Principal Magistrate Juvenile Justice Board, Meerut that it has been verified by the 'Board'. It has also been mentioned that in the aforesaid orders that, Medical Board has opined about the age of Sachin approximately 18 years. It is relevant to mention here that the age certificate of Sachin Kumar issued by the office of the Chief Medical Officer, Meerut dated 21.11.2013 has mentioned the age of Sachin Kumar was above 18 years.
(3.) It is pertinent to mention here that date on which, the age certificate has been issued i.e. three months ahead of the date, month and year of the alleged incident i.e.7.8.2013.;