T.P.S.MANN, J. - (1.) ORDER passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Moga on 5.9.2005 while charging the petitioner and others under Section 306 IPC, has been challenged by filing the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
(2.) AS per the prosecution case Smt. Rashwinder Kaur @ Palo committed suicide on 27.7.2004 in the area of city of Moga for which the petitioner and others were arraigned as accused in the FIR, which was got registered by Ramesh Singh, brother of the deceased under Section 306 IPC. After the presentation of the challan and the commitment of the case to the Court of Sessions, Additional Judge, Moga heard the arguments on charge and after perusing the challan, statements recorded in the Court and document annexed with the challan, found a prima facie case against all the accused, including the petitioner for having committed an offence punishable under Section 306 IPC. The petitioner has taken the plea that he was born on 18.10.1988. He attached birth certificate issued by the Registrar of the Births and Deaths (Annexure P-1) and also middle standard examination certificate (Annexure P- 2), wherein the petitioner was shown to be born on the said date. More so, at the time of grant of bail to the petitioner on 12.5.2005, Additional Sessions Judge, Moga noted that the petitioner was a juvenile offender. On the basis of the aforementioned circumstances, the petitioner pleaded that on the date of occurrence i.e. 27.7.2004, he was below 16 years of age and, thus, a juvenile in view of the provisions contained in Section 2(k) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Once he was shown to be a juvenile, he could not be charged jointly along with other accused, who were not juveniles.
(3.) REPLY has been filed by the State wherein the stand is taken that the petitioner did not produce his certificate regarding date of birth before the trial Court nor any application was moved in this behalf earlier before the said Court. However, it was stated in para 6 of the reply that if the petitioner proves himself to be a juvenile, he was entitled to be dealt with under the Act.;