The Uttarakhand High Court has ruled that in cases where there is uncertainty regarding the age of an accused person, the trial court or magistrate must first ascertain it before proceeding further. The directive came from Justice Ashish Naithani while examining a matter where the accused, convicted in a Haridwar murder case, was found to be a juvenile at the time of the offence.
The Court observed that the convict was only 14 years, 7 months, and 8 days old when the alleged crime took place. Accordingly, he is to be treated as a minor, and his case has been ordered to be transferred to the Juvenile Justice Board for appropriate adjudication under juvenile law.
Justice Naithani stressed that the responsibility lies with the magistrate or trial court to verify the age of an accused at the stage of initial remand. The Court clarified that birth certificates, school admission registers, or equivalent records should serve as the primary basis of determining age. Where such documents are unavailable, medical examination may be relied upon for confirmation.
The High Court further directed that the earlier stay on the petitioner’s sentence, along with the bail order, will continue to operate. However, the entire trial court record is to be transferred to the Juvenile Justice Board, which will now re-examine the matter and pass a fresh order in accordance with law.
To ensure uniform compliance, the Court instructed the Registrar General of the High Court to circulate its ruling across all subordinate courts, including Trial Courts, Magistrates, Chief Judicial Magistrates, Sessions Courts, and Special Courts dealing with criminal jurisdiction.
The Court underlined that at the stage of first remand, every presiding judicial officer must ascertain the accused’s age. If doubt persists, it is mandatory to seek documentary evidence such as birth certificates or school records. Only in the absence of such records should a medical opinion be relied upon.
Picture Source :
