Allahabad High Court
Prem Chandra vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 24 January, 2023
Bench: Suresh Kumar Gupta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 14
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 58 of 2023
Revisionist :- Prem Chandra
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. And Another
Counsel for Revisionist :- Syed Mohammad Abuzar Zaidi,Atul Kumar Trivedi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.
Heard Mr. Syed Mohammad Abuzar Zaidi, learned counsel for revisionist, learned Mr. Vinay Kumar Shahi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.
By means of this criminal revision, the revision has challenged the judgment and order dated 4.11.2022 passed by learned Special Judge (Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act)/Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No. 8, Lucknow in Criminal Appeal No. 384 of 2014 (Rajaram and others Vs. State of U.P.) Police Station Mohanlalganj, District Lucknow whereby the application of the revisionist claiming to be juvenile has been rejected.
Learned counsel for revisionist has submitted that on 29.03.2002 opposite party no. 2 submitted an application before the Police Station Mohanlalganj, against the revisionist and two other persons, which was registered as NCR under Sections 323 and 325 IPC. Further submission is that revisionist is a juvenile. In support of his submission the revisionist has submitted a Transfer Certificate of Junior High School before the trial court showing his date of birth as 05.06.1986 while the date of incident is 28.03.2002. According to this certificate the the juvenile at the time of incident was 15 years, 9 months and 23 days. It is further submitted that during investigation, the revisionist raised this plea but the Investigating Officer did not consider this fact and submitted charge sheet against the revisionist. The investigation of the revisionist was also conducted as considered to be major. Further submission is that earlier the question of juvenility was not raised by the counsel before the trial court. During course of appeal after sometime, the revisionist moved an application bearing No. B-22 in Criminal Appeal No. 384 of 2014 claiming himself to be juvenile but this application was rejected by the trial court without application of judicious mind on the ground that first attendance certificate showing his bona-fide with respect to date of birth could not be produced by the revisionist and thus the application for declaration of juvenile was rejected by the trial court.
Being aggrieved with this order, this criminal revision has been preferred by the revisionist.
He has submitted that at the time of hearing before the appellate court the revisionist could not produce the mark-sheet of Class-V in which the date of birth depicts as 5.6.1986. Thus this date of birth is the same as produced by the revisionist in the Transfer Certificate. It is further submitted that thus at the time of incident, the revisionist was juvenile.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed this revision but has admitted the aforesaid position.
In view of the above, this criminal revision is disposed of with a direction that the matter is remanded back to the trial court. It is further directed that the trial court shall pass a fresh order in accordance with law in the light of the the mark sheet as well as transfer certificate of the revisionist. Learned appellate court may also consider the relevant document for determining the claim of juvenility of revisionist.
With the aforesaid observations/directions, this revision is disposed of.
Order Date :- 24.1.2023
Virendra
