Akbar Ali vs State Of U.P. And Anr.
2019 Latest Caselaw 6348 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 66
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2960 of 2019
 

 
Revisionist :- Akbar Ali
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr.
 
Counsel for Revisionist :- Arvind Agrawal
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.

Heard learned counsel for the revisionists as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

The present criminal revision has been filed against the impugned judgment and order dated 29.5.2019 passed by learned Additional Session Judge, Court No.7, Fatehpur in Sessions Trial No. 279 of 2017 (State v. Akbar Ali), arising out of Case Crime No. 63 of 2017, under Section 302 I.P.C., P.S. Khakhreru, District- Fatehpur.

Submission of the learned counsel for the revisionist is that the impugned order whereby the learned court in the exercise of power under Section 15 of the Juvenile Justice Act has referred the matter to Juvenile Justice Board to make preliminary assessment of the revisionist with regard to the mental and physical capacity to commit such offence, ability to understand the consequences of the offence and the circumstances in which he allegedly committed the offence and pass an order in accordance with the provisions of sub-Section 3 of Section 18 of Juvenile Justice Act, 2015.

Learned counsel for the revisionist has submitted that the provisions of Section 15 shall only apply when the child in conflict with law has completed or is above of 16 years of age, the matter could be referred for determination under Section 18 (3) of Juvenile Justice Act. It is argued that, in fact, CW-2 and CW-3 the officials of the first attended school has proved his date of birth to be 1.1.2002 and considering this the revisionist would be 15 years 3 months and 27 days.

I have gone through the impugned order whereby the learned Judge by a detailed and reasoned order has discarded the marks-sheet of first attended school in which his date of birth has been shown as 1.1.2002. The marks-sheet is stated to have been issued by Swami Ramanand Bal Vidyalaya, Mau and CW-1, Krishna Vishal has stated that the said institution got recognition by the authority on 2.5.2006 for a temporary period of five years. Thus, the court has rejected the application of the revisionist and on the basis of medical assessment done by the medical board that he is 16 years of age has referred the matter to Juvenile Justice Board under Section 15 of Juvenile Justice Act.

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the revisionist.

In my opinion, the learned Judge has not committed any manifest error of law or illegality.

The present criminal revision is bereft of merits and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.

Order Date :- 1.8.2019

Vikas