SUBHASH CHANDRA AGARWAL,J. - (1.) THIS revision under Section 53 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 is directed against the order dated 13th November, 2007 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge/F.T.C. No. 4, Muzaffar Nagar in S.T. No. 1462 of 2007; State Vs. Arif and others whereby the application of accused-revisionist Monu @ Chhota @ Ashish dated 5.11.2007 for declaring him juvenile in conflict with law was rejected.
(2.) HEARD Sri Onkar Singh, learned counsel for the revisionist, learned AGA for the State and Sri Pankaj Bharti, learned counsel for respondent no. 2, Nafees (complainant). In brief the facts are that the revisionist Monu @ Chhota @ Ashish is an accused in the aforesaid S.T. No. 1462 of 2007. On 5.11.2007 an application was moved by him before the Court below stating therein that he was minor on the date of incident and the police, at the time of his arrest, had shown his age to be 15 years and therefore, his case be separated and sent to Juvenile Justice Board for decision. On the same day, learned trial court heard argument on the application and by order dated 13.11.2007 rejected the application for declaring the accused Monu @ Chhota @ Ashish as juvenile in conflict with law.
(3.) IT is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that the learned trial court did not provide any opportunity to the revisionist to produce evidence in support of his claim of juvenility and did not follow the procedure prescribed in Section 7-A of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). It is further submitted that the trial court was bound to make an enquiry and reasonable opportunity should have been given to the revisionist to lead evidence in support of his case. The accused could also be medically examined by a Medical Board and thereafter the trial court could have formed an opinion regarding the age of the accused on the date of the crime.;