Abhishek Sharma S/O Late Mohan Lal ... vs State Of Rajasthan Through Pp
2021 Latest Caselaw 2159 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

           S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 148/2019

Abhishek Sharma S/o Late Mohan Lal, Aged About 20 Years, R/o
Ward No 02 Guhala Ps Sadar Neema Ka Thana Teh. Neem Ka
Thana Dist. Sikar Raj.
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                   Versus
1.      State Of Rajasthan Through Pp, Raj.
2.      Smt. Kaushalya Devi W/o Shri Birbal, R/o Guhala Ps
        Neema Ka Thana Dist. Sikar Raj.
                                                                ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bheem Singh Dabla, Adv. on behalf of Mr. Yunus Khan, Adv.

For Respondent(s)        :     Mr. Pankaj Agarwal, PP
                               Mr. Ravi Jangir, Adv.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA

Order

Date of Reserve: 04/03/2021 Date of Pronouncement : 05/03/2021

By way of this revision petition, petitioner wants to

challenge the order dated 13.12.2018 passed by the learned

Special Judge, Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act,

2012 and Child Right Prevention Commission Act, 2005, Sikar in

Criminal Regular Appeal CIS No.02/2018 in which learned Judge

has confirmed the order passed by the Juvenile Justice Board,

Sikar in Regular Criminal Case No.14/2015 in which Juvenile

Justice Board declared that the petitioner is a major.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during

the trial, respondent No.2 moved an application before the

Juvenile Justice Board on 24.04.2015 that the petitioner is a

(2 of 5) [CRLR-148/2019]

major. So, the matter be committed before the Sessions Court for

trial. After hearing the parties, Juvenile Justice Board rejected the

application vide order dated 31.07.2015. After that, complainant

respondent No.2 filed an appeal before the Appellate Court which

was allowed by the learned Appellate Court vide order dated

02.03.2016 and remanded the matter to the board for re-examine

the age of the petitioner. Said order was challenged by the

petitioner by way of criminal revision petition No.555/2016 before

this Court which was dismissed on 04.01.2017. After that, Juvenile

Justice Board, Sikar hold the inquiry and passed the order on

01.06.2018 treated petitioner as a major. Petitioner filed an appeal

before the learned Special Judge, Protection of Children From

Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Child Right Prevention Commission

Act, 2005, Sikar who rejected the appeal filed by the petitioner-

appellant on 13.12.2018.

Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that

Juvenile Justice Board as well as learned Special Judge, Protection

of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Child Right

Prevention Commission Act, 2005, Sikar had committed patent

illegality in declaring the petitioner as a major.

Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that as

per Juvenile Justice Act, Court below has to consider the

secondary board certificate in which age of the petitioner is stated

as 10.07.1998.

Learned Juvenile Justice Board as well as learned

Special Judge, Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act,

2012 and Child Right Prevention Commission Act, 2005, Sikar

(3 of 5) [CRLR-148/2019]

wrongly considered the petitioner's date of birth 30.07.1994.

Petitioner had not admitted in the Government Higher Secondary

School, Dehera(Ghuhala) in first class. Signature of the

petitioner's father is not proved on the admission form. So, the

revision petition be allowed. Order passed by the Juvenile Justice

Board and confirmed by learned Special Judge, Protection of

Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Child Right

Prevention Commission Act, 2005, Sikar be quashed and set

aside.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the

judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal

No.1296/2017 decided on 01.08.2017 (Lok Nath Pandey

Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another).

Learned counsel for the respondent as well as learned

Public Prosecutor have opposed the arguments advanced by the

learned counsel for the petitioner and submitted that this Court in

S. B. Criminal Revision Petition No.555/2016 (Abhishek @ Bachcha

Vs Smt. Kaushalya Devi & Anr.) confirmed the order passed by

learned Special Judge, Protection of Children From Sexual

Offences Act, 2012 and Child Right Prevention Commission Act,

2005, Sikar.

Learned counsel for the respondent submits that

petitioner had admitted in first class, Government Higher

Secondary School, Dehera(Ghuhala) and filled the entrance form

which was exhibited during the trial. Learned counsel for the

respondent also submits that petitioner had not given any

evidence regarding the admission form that it was not genuine.

(4 of 5) [CRLR-148/2019]

Learned counsel for the respondent also submits that the order

passed by the Juvenile Justice Board and confirmed by the learned

Special Judge, Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act,

2012 and Child Right Prevention Commission Act, 2005, Sikar be

upheld and revision petition be dismissed.

Learned counsel for the respondent has relied upon the

judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal

No.1081/2019(Sanjeev Kumar Gupta Vs. State of Uttar

Pradesh and Another) decided on 25.07.2019.

I have considered the arguments advanced by learned

counsel for the petitioner as well as respondent and perused the

material available on record.

Juvenile Justice Board held the enquiry as per the order

of the learned Special Judge, Protection of Children From Sexual

Offences Act, 2012 and Child Right Prevention Commission Act,

2005, Sikar which was confirmed by this Court in criminal revision

petition No.555/2016. In enquiry documents of admission in the

first class was exhibited and proved by the concerned Head

Master. Admission form of the first class also filled by the father of

the petitioner. Petitioner had not produced any evidence before

the Juvenile Justice Board that the said form was not genuine. So,

learned Juvenile Justice Board as well as the learned Special

Judge, Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and

Child Right Prevention Commission Act, 2005, Sikar have not

committed any error in declaring the petitioner as a major.

(5 of 5) [CRLR-148/2019]

So, the revision petition filed by the petitioner being

devoid of merit, deserves to be rejected.

Accordingly, the revision petition is dismissed.

The pending applications also stand disposed of.

(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J

Jatin/93

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)