Chandramouli Budholiya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 7724 MP

                                                                          1
                                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                                AT JABALPUR
                                                                       BEFORE
                                                      HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY
                                                                  ON THE 14th OF JUNE, 2022

                                                        CRIMINAL REVISION No. 1903 of 2022

                                               Between:-
                                               CHANDRAMOULI BUDHOLIYA S/O JAGDISH
                                               PRASAD BUDHOLIYA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
                                               OCCUPATION: ADVOCATE R/O WARD NO. 9,
                                               GOVINDGARH, DISTRICT REWA (MADHYA
                                               PRADESH)

                                                                                                       .....APPLICANT
                                               (BY SHRI PUSHPENDRA DUBEY, ADVOCATE)

                                               AND

                                               THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
                                               POLICE STATION GOVINDGARH DISTRICT
                                               REWA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                   .....RESPONDENTS
                                               (BY SHRI PURUSHOTTAM SONI, PANEL LAWYER)

                                            This revision coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
                                      following:
                                                                          ORDER

This criminal revision has been filed under Section 397/401 of the Code

of Criminal Procedure against the order dated 12.05.2022 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Rewa in SC ATR No.131/2021 whereby learned Special Judge rejected applicant's prayer to send his case to Juvenile Justice Board for trial.

Brief facts of the case which are relevant for the disposal of this criminal Signature Not Verified SAN revision are that complainant Prakash Budholiya lodged a written complaint Digitally signed by RANJEET AHIRWAL Date: 2022.06.17 16:49:55 IST before the Police Station Govindgarh, Rewa averring that applicant

Chandramouli Budholiya prepared a forged adoption deed mentioning that the late Sukhai Kol and his wife Rajni Kol, who belonged to Scheduled Tribe community adopted the applicant as their son and on the basis of that forged adoption deed took the benefit of the Government schemes made for the benefit of persons belonging to Scheduled Tribe Community. Even in the year 2003-2004, the applicant contested the election of Member of Janpad Panchayat, Govindgarh, District Rewa from the seat reserved for Scheduled Tribe Community. On that report police registered Crime No.241/2008 against the applicant for the offences punishable under Section 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC and Section 3 (2)(5) of SC/ST Act at Police Station Govindgarh, District

Rewa and investigated the matter. After the investigation police filed the charge sheet against the applicant before the Special Judge (Atrocities Act). On that charge sheet, Special Sessions Trial No.131/2021 was registered against the applicant. Learned Special Judge framed charge against the applicant for the offence punishable under Section 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC and Section 3(2) (5) of SC/ST Act and tried the case.

During the trial of the case, the applicant filed an application averring that it is alleged that the applicant prepared a forged adoption deed during the year 1978 to 2008 while in the year 1978 applicant was minor so the case of the applicant be sent to Juvenile Justice Board for trial. Learned Special Judge rejected applicant's application observing that the court did not frame charge against the applicant that he prepared forged adoption deed in the year 1978 and at this stage, it cannot be ascertained that on which date applicant prepared that document, it requires evidence to decide. Being aggrieved from that order, the Signature Not Verified SAN

applicant filed this revision.

Digitally signed by RANJEET AHIRWAL Date: 2022.06.17 16:49:55 IST

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that in the charge framed by

the learned Special Judge against the applicant under Section 467 of IPC, it is clearly mentioned that the applicant prepared forged adoption deed during the year 1978 to 2008 and in the year 1978 applicant was minor. So learned Special Judge has no jurisdiction to try the case. The case of the applicant should be tried by the Juvenile Justice Board. Learned Special Judge committed a mistake in rejecting the applicant's application. In this regard, he also placed reliance on the judgments passed by the Apex Court in the cases of Darga Ram @ Gunga v. State of Rajasthan reported in (2015) 2 SCC 775 and Raju v. State of Haryana reported in AIR 2019 SC 1136 and the judgment of Meghalaya High Court passed in the case of Shri Bashan Skhem Kharsahnoh v. State of Meghalaya in Crl. Petn. 67 of 2021.

Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer and submitted that in the charge sheet there is no specific allegation against the applicant that he prepared forged adoption deed in the year 1978. The trial court framed charge against the applicant that the applicant prepared a forged adoption deed during the year 1978 to 2008. On which date the applicant prepared said forged adoption deed will be ascertained from the evidence. It is alleged that on the basis of that document applicant contested the election of Member of Janpad Panchayat, Govindgarh, District Rewa in the year 2003-2004 and undisputedly at that time applicant was major and learned Special Judge specifically framed

charge in this regard against the applicant. So learned Special Judge did not commit any mistake in rejecting the applicant's prayer. Hence, the revision should be dismissed.

Signature Not Verified SAN This Court has gone through the record and arguments put forth by the

Digitally signed by RANJEET AHIRWAL learned counsel for the parties. Applicant filed this revision against the order Date: 2022.06.17 16:49:55 IST

dated 12.05.2022 passed by Special Judge SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Rewa, while according to provisions of Section 14A (1) of SC/ST Act, an appeal should be filed against that order. So this revision is not maintainable.

Though it is settled that the relevant date to determine juvenility is the date of commission of the offence and not the date when that person is arrested by the police or brought before the competent authority, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Single Bench of Himachal Pradesh High Court in the above-mentioned judgments. In this case, it is not the case of the prosecution that applicant had prepared forged adoption deed in the year 1978. It is alleged that the alleged forged adoption deed was prepared by the applicant on any date during the year 1978 to 2008. Whether the applicant prepared said forged adoption deed, if yes on which date. It has to be decided by the trial court on the basis of prosecution evidence. Furthermore, it is also alleged that the applicant used that forged adoption deed in the year 2003-2004 and in this regard trial court has framed a specific charge against the applicant under Section 471 of the IPC. In the year 2003-2004 applicant was a major. So learned trial court did not commit any mistake in rejecting the applicant's application. Hence, revision is dismissed.

A copy of this order be sent to the trial court for necessary compliance.

(RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY) JUDGE (ra)

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by RANJEET AHIRWAL Date: 2022.06.17 16:49:55 IST