- (1.) B. K. Rathi, J. Heard Sri V. P. Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A. G. A.
(2.) THIS revision has been filed under Sections 397, 401, Cr. P. C. against the order dated 11-8-1998 passed by VIIth Additional Sessions Judge, Agra in S. T No. 659 of 1993. The facts of the case are that the applicant is facing trial under Section 376, I. P. C. He moved an application alleging that he is minor and should be tried before the Juvenile Judge. That application was rejected by the impugned order. Ag grieved by it, the present revision has been preferred. The incident of this case took place on 25-11-89 and the offence is registered under Section 376, I. P. C. The charge against the applicant was framed on 3-1-94. Thereafter, six witnesses were ex amined in the case till 6-10-1995. The ap plicant had never raised any objection since 1989 to 6-10-1995 that he is juvenile. Thereafter, he moved an application that he is juvenile on the basis of a school certificate. Prima facie the allegation ap pears to be false and it appears that the applicant was not able to find any defence, therefore, he manipulated a school certifi cate and moved an application that he was minor on the date of the incident. All this fact shows that false certificate was ob tained and the applicant is not a juvenile.
(3.) IT has been experienced that the accused are using Juvenile Justice Act as defence and obtain false school certificates and alleged that he is juvenile only to cause delay in the disposal of the case. The present case is similar, expected the certifi cate, the applicant did not produce any evidence that he was juvenile in the year 1989. The application was rightly rejected. I do not find any illegality in the order. The revision is dismissed. Revision dismissed. .;