Satish Kumar vs State Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi
2013 Latest Caselaw 1015 Del

$~16
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+    CRL.A. 318/2012 and Crl.M.A.4433/2012

     SATISH KUMAR                               ..... Appellant
                        Through:     Mr. Anirudh K. Mudgal, Adv.

                        versus

     STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI        ..... Respondent
                   Through: Ms. Rajdipa Behura, APP for the State
                            with SI P.L.Meena, PS Narela.

     CORAM:
     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL

                          ORDER

% 28.02.2013

1. The Appellant has been convicted for an offence punishable under Sections 392/397/411 IPC. He was sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay fine of `5,000/-.

2. During the course of hearing, the Appellant raised a plea of juvenility.

During inquiry, the Appellant produced a certificate purported to be issued by Bal Bharti Modern Middle School, Nathupur, Sonepat, Haryana. Since the Appellant was admitted in the earlier said school in Class III and it was not the Appellant's case that this was a school first attended by him, the birth certificate issued by the said school was rejected.

3. By an order dated 03.01.2013, this Court held that since no evidence as to the Appellant's age under Rule 12 (3) (a) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007 (Rules of 2007) is available his age to be determined in terms of Rule 12 (3) (b) of the Rules of 2007. This Court, therefore, issued direction to the Medical Superintendent, Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital to constitute a Medical Board to determine the Appellant's age.

4. A report has been received that the age of the Appellant as on the date of his examination, that is, on 29.01.2013 is more than 21 years and less than 25 years and it could be between 22 to 24 years. If the Appellant's age is taken as 22 years on 29.01.2013, on the date of the commission of the offence, that is, on 23.01.2005 he was between 14 to 16 years. This is also corroborated by the school leaving certificate produced by the Appellant.

5. In this view of matter, the Appeal is allowed and the Appellant is held to be a juvenile.

6. The Appellant is in custody in this case for a period of about one year.

Since the inquiry in respect of commission of an offence has to be conducted by the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB), the impugned order passed by the learned ASJ cannot be sustained; the same is accordingly set aside.

7. The matter is remitted to the Juvenile Justice Board for inquiry in accordance with law.

8. The Appellant is directed to be produced before the JJB on 11.03.2013.

9. A copy of the order be transmitted to the Superintendent Jail for information and compliance.

10. A copy of the order shall also be forwarded to the concerned Juvenile Justice Board.

G.P. MITTAL, J.

FEBRUARY 28, 2013 vk