Ravindra Nath Kakkar, J. - (1.) This criminal revision has been filed against the judgment and order dated 23.05.2013 passed by learned Sessions Judge,Varanasi in Criminal Appeal No. 83 of 2013 (Abdul Hakim Ansari Vs. State) and order dated 20.4.2013 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 1, Varanasi in Case Crime No. 300 of 2012, under section 302 IPC and section 4/25 Arms Act, Police Station Maduadeeh, District Varanasi.
(2.) The relevant facts of this revision is that the learned Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi vide order dated 20.4.2013 declared the accused Rustam Ali as delinquent juvenile and the appellate court dismissed the appeal and confirmed the order of Judicial Magistrate declaring the accused as juvenile. Aggrieved against the same, this revision has been filed.
(3.) It is contended on behalf of learned counsel for the revisionist that the order of Magistrate is illegal, without application of judicial mind and against the evidence on record. Further contended that the order of constituting a medical board for determination of the age of the opposite party No. 2 and as per opinion of the board dated 20.3.2013, the age of the opposite party No. 2 was found to be about 18 years, but in spite of this, the court below acted totally in mechanical fashions and solely relying upon the medical certificate, had given the benefit of one year grace in favour of opposite party no. 2 declaring the accused as juvenile and also appellate court dismissed the appeal on 23.5.2013 without appreciating the material on record. It is next contended that opposite party no. 2 had deliberately tried to hide its actual age and the conduct of opposite party no. 2 is malafide. The order of the court below has been passed only on assumption and presumption without considering the nature of the offence.;