R.K.BAG, J. - (1.) THIS criminal revision is preferred by the petitioner against the Order no. 33 dated 18.02.2014 passed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bench ­ II, City Sessions Court, Calcutta in Sessions Case No. 52 of 2012 corresponding to G. R. Case No. 1110 of 2012 arising out of Bowbazar Police Station Case No. 143 of 2012 dated 20.03.2012 under Sections 489B/489C/120B of the Indian Penal Code, by which learned Judge of the court below did not hold the petitioner as juvenile on the date of commission of the offence.
(2.) THE background of filing of the instant criminal revision is that the petitioner raised the plea before the trial court that he was juvenile on the date of commission of the offence, that is, on 20 -03 - 2012. It appears from record that the petitioner took the plea of juvenility before the trial court by filing an application on 13 -05 - 2013 on the basis of transfer certificate of the school. By passing an order on 19 -08 -2013 learned Judge of the court below found that the school certificate produced by the petitioner is not a genuine document and as such learned Judge of the court below did not rely on that school certificate. In the absence of production of genuine documents enumerated in Rule 12 (3) (a) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007 learned Judge of the court below sought for expert opinion from a duly constituted medical board for consideration of the plea of juvenility of the petitioner. It appears from the report of the medical board dated 18 -09 - 2013 that the age of the petitioner is assessed between 20 years and 22 years on the date of his radiological examination on consideration of the physical findings, dental and radiological findings on 18 -09 -2013. It further appears from the impugned order dated 12 -11 -2013 passed by learned judge of the court below that learned judge gave relaxation of six months on the lower side of the age for consideration of the plea of juvenility of the petitioner. This impugned order dated 12 -11 -2013 passed by learned judge of the court below was challenged by the petitioner before High Court in CRR 3807 of 2013. It also appears from record that His Lordship Hon'ble Justice Tarun Kumar Gupta disposed of the said criminal revision being CRR 3807 of 2013 on 16 -01 -2014 by setting aside the impugned order dated 12 -11 -2013 passed by learned judge of the court below and by giving direction to the court below to pass a further order assessing the age of the petitioner on the basis of the report of the medical board keeping in mind the specific provisions of Rule 12(3)b) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007 as well as nature and object of the said Act. In compliance with the direction given by this High Court, learned judge of the trial court passed the impugned order dated 18 -02 - 2014 without holding the petitioner as juvenile and without giving any relaxation of age on the lower side as envisaged under Rule 12 (3) (b) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007 on the ground that above rule is not mandatory in nature and that the petitioner is not entitled to get the benefit of relaxation of one year of age on the lower side as he produced fake document in support of his plea of juvenility before the court.
(3.) MR . Ramdulal Manna, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007 and the Juvenile Justice ( Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 are beneficial legislations and the petitioner is entitled to get the benefit of the said legislation.;