- (1.) Petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 2.2.2013 passed by the learned Addl. Judicial Commissioner-VI, Ranchi, in ST. No. 3685 of 2012, whereby the application filed by the petitioner for declaring him to be juvenile, has been rejected by the Court below. Petitioner has been made accused for the offence under Sections 302/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code in connection with Namkum P.S. Case No. 100 of 2012, corresponding to G.R. No. 2742 of 2012. The case relates to murder of the father of the petitioner, whose dead body was recovered from well and the petitioner, his mother, his brother and other co-accused were made accused in this case. It also appears from the impugned order that the bail applications of the petitioner were rejected by the Court of Session, as also by the High Court on merits. Thereafter, the petitioner made application for declaring him to be a juvenile annexing therewith the transfer certificate issued by a school. The Court below appears to have disbelieved the said certificate, and dismissed the application of the petitioner taking into consideration the facts that the application was made at a belated stage and that in his confessional statement the petitioner had disclosed his age to be 19 years.
(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned order passed by the Court below is absolutely illegal. It has been submitted that once the application was filed in the Court below for declaring the petitioner to be juvenile, the Court ought to have entered into an enquiry for determining the age of the petitioner and ought to have dispose of the application on its merits in terms of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007. Learned counsel accordingly, submitted that the impugned order cannot be sustained in the eyes of law.
(3.) Learned counsel for the State on the other hand has opposed the prayer, but has admitted that that the enquiry has not been conducted in terms of the said Rules.;