Kamta vs State Of U.P. Thru Prin Secy Home ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 8435 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 10
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4944 of 2022
 

 
Applicant :- Kamta
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru Prin Secy Home U.P. Lko And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Manju Singh
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.

1. Heard Ms Manju Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Ran Vijay Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. Present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed impugning order dated 12.01.2021 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.16, POCSO Act, Sitapur in S.T. No.67 of 2015: Crime No.57 of 2015, under Section 376 IPC, 3/4 POCSO Act Police Station Piswan, District Sitapur.

3. The petitioner, accused claims to be juvenile on the date of incident. However, his claim for juvenility was rejected by the Juvenile Justice Board. No appeal was filed against the said order rejecting the claim of the petitioner to be juvenile and the order passed by the Juvenile Justice Board attained finality.

4. The accused-petitioner was convicted by the Sessions court vide order dated 18.09.2021 and sentenced him for life imprisonment for offence under Section 376 IPC, 3/4 POCSO Act.

5. The accused-petitioner instituted Criminal Appeal No.1583 of 2021 before this Court against the judgment and order of his conviction. While hearing the bail application of the accused-petitioner in the appeal, issue of juvenility was raised.

6. Accused-petitioner during the course of trial raised plea of juvenility before the Sessions Court and learned Sessions Court rejected the plea of juvenility vide impugned order dated 12.01.2021.

7. This order was not challenged in the revision before this Court, therefore, impugned order also attained finality. Division Bench of this Court while hearing the bail application observed that the petitioner may take a chance to challenge the impugned order dated 12.01.2021 and thus, present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging the order dated 12.01.2021 passed by learned Sessions Court.

8. After Juvenile Justice Board rejected the plea of juvenility of the accused, the petitioner did not challenge the said order in the appeal. However, during the course of trial plea of juvenility was again raised. Trial Court constituted a medical board vide order dated 03.12.2020 for examination of the accused.

9. Medical Board vide its report dated 11.12.2020 found the medical age of the accused-petitioner to be 25 years. The incident took place on 16.02.2015 and thus, trial Court was of the view that the accused-petitioner would be more than 20 years of age on the date of incident.

10. Impugned order is well reasoned order passed on scientific evidence i.e. medical evidence. This Court does not find that there is any error of law or jurisdiction committed by the revisional court. This petition being devoid of merit and substance is hereby dismissed.

(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.)

Order Date :- 28.7.2022

prateek