Delhi High Court
Hukum Singh & Anr. vs The State (Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi) on 4 February, 2015
Author: Manmohan Singh
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Order delivered on: 4th February, 2015
+ CRL.A. 486/2001
HUKUM SINGH & ANR. ..... Appellants
Through: Ms. Inderjeet Sidhu, Adv.
versus
THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Satish Kr. Verma, APP for the
State.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH
MANMOHAN SINGH, J. (Oral)
Crl. M.A. No.6941/2014 (for restoration of the appeal) and
Crl. M.A. No.13384/2014 (for directions, by appellants)
1. The present appeal has been filed by two appellants namely,
Hukum Singh and Mukesh under Section 374 (2) read with Section
482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for setting aside the
impugned judgment and order dated 19th May, 2001 passed by the
learned Additional Sessions Judge, New Delhi in Sessions Case No.
24/2000.
2. I have been informed that Mukesh has died during the
pendency of the appeal and the appeal against him is abated on 4th
August, 2010. Hukum Singh is serving his sentence for ten years of
imprisonment and at present he is in Central Jail No.2, Tihar, New
Delhi. He was granted bail on 14th July, 2003 till the final disposal of
the appeal. The appeal was listed before Court. Since no one
appeared on behalf of Hukum Singh, the same was dismissed on 31st
October, 2011. Subsequently, two applications for restoration were
filed for reviving the appeal. Since no one appeared on behalf of the
appellant Hukum Singh, the said applications for restoration were
also dismissed for non-prosecution. Lastly, the present application
being Crl. M.A. No.13384/2014 is filed on behalf of the appellant
seeking issuance of direction to respondent to conduct the
ossification test to ascertain the age of appellant in terms of Section
7A of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000.
3. The nominal roll of the appellant is placed on record by the
State. It is recorded in the nominal roll that the appellant had
undergone sentence including under trial period as on 13th August,
2014 for 5 years, 6 months and 29 days. It is apparent that the
appellant has already spent more than 6 years. It is stated by the
appellant in the application that he was juvenile on the date of
commission of offence i.e. 16th April, 2000, on the basis of School
Leaving Certificate and his age was almost 14 years, 8 months and
22 days as on 16th April, 2000, since Section 2(k) of Juvenile Justice
(Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 as amended upto date
defines a juvenile which reads as "juvenile or child means a person,
who has not completed eighteen years of age".
4. The applicant/appellant relies on the judgment passed by the
Apex Court in the matter of Hari Ram vs. State of Rajasthan in
Crl.Appeal No. 907/2009 arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 3336/2006
dated 5th May, 2009 and also in case of Abuzar Hossain @ Gulam
Hossain vs. State of West Bengal, (2012) 10 SCC 489, wherein it
has been held that benefit of being Juvenile can be given at any
stage and even after all the remedies have been exhausted.
5. It is further stated that the applicant is a permanent resident of
H.No. M-523, J.J. Colony, Sawda, P.S. Kanjhawala, Ghevra, Delhi
and the Applicant is having "School Leaving Certificate" to prove his
date of birth which is 24th August, 1985 as per records and this Court
may get it authenticated from school record or alternative by directing
bone age test i.e. age determination test of the applicant.
6. The applicant is furnishing the information about himself and
his family as per his best of knowledge which is as under:-
S.No. Names Place of Approx. Relation Status
residence Age as on
09.08.2014
1. Smt. Usha H.No. M-523, 50 years Mother Alive
Devi J.J. Colony,
Sawda, P.S.
W/o Late Sh.
Kanjhawala,
Anil Singh
Ghevra, Delhi
2. Hukum Singh H.No. M-523, 28 years Self Alive
J.J. Colony, (applicant)
S/o Late Sh.
Sawda, P.S.
Anil Singh
Kanjhawala,
Ghevra, Delhi
3. Arun Singh H.No. M-523, 26 years Younger Alive
J.J. Colony, brother
S/o Late Sh.
Sawda, P.S.
Anil Singh
Kanjhawala,
Ghevra, Delhi
4. Ms. Sapna Uttam nagar, 24 years Younger Alive
Delhi sister
W/o Sh.
(complete
Sandeep
address not
Singh, D/o
known by the
Late Sh. Anil
applicant)
Singh
7. The appellant is single and unmarried person. He was not
aware about the said provision of the Act, therefore, he was not able
to bring the same before learned Trial Court. Therefore, the present
application is filed for ossification test. Along with the application, the
appellant has also placed the School Leaving Certificate issued by
Vidya Niketan, Nanak Pura, New Delhi where his date of birth is
mentioned as 24th August, 1985.
8. The status report has also been filed by the State, which reads
as under:-
"This petition has been filed by the applicant to ascertain
the age in terms of Section 7(A) of Juvenile Justice (Care
and Protection Act 2000). Enquires have been made
from the first school that is N.P. Co. Edu. Sr. Sec. School
Bapu Dham, New Delhi and found the age of applicant is
mentioned at serial No.10 of the admission register is
11.10.1982 but in the photo copy of birth certificate the
age is mentioned as 24.08.1985. To ascertain the truth
enquires have also been made from the Registrar Birth &
Death, Delhi Cantonment Board. The certificate issued
by the Sub Registrar have mentioned no name of the
child but name of parents are mentioned regarding birth
dated 24.08.1985. The date of commission of offence is
15.04.2000.
If the age of applicant consider as 11.10.1982 as
per the school register, the age of the applicant on the
day of offence was 17 years, 6 months and 4 days and if
consider as 24.08.1985 his age was 14 years, 7 months
and 21 days. The copies of extract of the school register
and birth certificate issued by the Sub Registrar Birth &
Death, Delhi Cantonment Board are attached herewith for
perusal."
9. Learned counsel for the applicant/appellant, on instructions,
states that he is not pressing the appeal and conviction as well as the
pending application for restoration of the appeal.
10. Having considered the averments made in the application and
the documents placed on record along with the status report, the
sentence of the appellant is quashed. He be released forthwith. His
bail bond stands discharged.
11. The applications are accordingly disposed of.
(MANMOHAN SINGH)
JUDGE
FEBRUARY 04, 2015
