Debi Prosad Dey, J. - (1.) None appears on behalf of opposite party no. 1 and 2 despite repeated call. Affidavit of service shall be retained with the record. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 29.11.2013 passed by learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Burdwan in connection with Ausgram Police Station case no. 67 of 2009 wherein and where under learned Principal Magistrate of Juvenile Justice Board has held that opposite party no. 2 is a minor in terms of the ossification test report of opposite party no.2.
(2.) A case under Section 493/376 of the Indian Penal Code at the instance of the petitioner was started against opposite party no. 2 and ultimately after completion of investigation charge sheet under Section 376 was filed against opposite party no.2. Considering the age of opposite party no.2 learned Chief Judicial Magistrate has transferred the case to Juvenile Justice Board for inquiry and disposal.
(3.) The petitioner being aggrieved by such transfer of case to Juvenile Justice Board filed revision application before this Court being CRR no. 3015 of 2011. The specific case that was canvassed before this Court in the aforesaid criminal revisional application is that opposite party no.2 was major at the time of alleged occurrence. After hearing both sides learned Judge passed the following order. "Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The matter is taken up for hearing. It is submitted that this is a case under sections 493/376 of the Indian Penal Code. It is further submitted by Mr. Chatterjee, learned counsel for the petitioner that the victim girl is major. The accused-opposite party no.2 namely Shamim alias Bapi Dafadar, is a minor. As per direction of the Hon'ble Court birth certificate was filed which shows that the opposite party no.2 is a minor. Thereafter the victim girl filed an application before the learned court below for ossification test of the opposite party no.2. The same was rejected after hearing both sides. Probably being influenced by the order of the Hon'ble Court the learned court below rejected the prayer for ossification test of the opposite party no.2. It appears that ossification test is conducted scientifically and there is no harm for conducting such test of a person through there is a contradictory order by the court. Considering the aforesaid position and after hearing the both sides, I think that in the interest of justice the opposite party no.2 be placed for ossification test. The learned court below is hereby directed to arrange for ossification test of the opposite party no.2 as quickly as possible so that the entire truth will come up. Accordingly, the revisional application along with C.R.A.N. 425 of 2012 is disposed of on contest.";