Harbans Lal, J. - (1.) The instant revision petition under Section 397/401 is directed against the order dated 7.6.2006 passed by the learned Additional. Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 1, Ajmer in Sessions Case No. 77/2005 vide which the petitioner has been held to be not a minor.
(2.) Admittedly, no inquiry with regard to the age of the petitioner has been conducted by the competent authority as per the provisions of Section 49 of the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2000 read with Rule 22 (5) of the Rajasthan Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Rules, 2002. The court below appears to have held the petitioner of more than 18 years of age on the basis of the medical report. But the procedure to be followed by the Board in holding inquiries for the determination of the age of the alleged juveniles has not been followed and kept in view. It, therefore, appears to be expedient in the interest of justice to get due inquiry made with regard to the age of the petitioner by the competent authority.
(3.) It is, therefore, directed that the petitioner may make proper application before the concerned Board or the competent authority for making inquiry with regard to his age as per the provisions of Section 49 of the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2000 read with Rule 22(5) of the Rajasthan Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Rules, 2002. In case such an application is moved by or on behalf of the petitioner, the competent authority shall hold inquiry as per the aforesaid provisions as expeditiously as possible, but not later than one month from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order and record a finding with regard to the age of the petitioner stating his age as nearly as possible.;