Rajesh Maurya vs State of U.P.

Bhagwan Din, J.—This criminal revision has been directed against the order dated 1761999 passed by the VII Additional Sessions Judge, Azamgarh holdingthe revisionist not juvenile.

The revisionist is an accused in a criminal case arising out of an incident dated 1741998. Before the trial commenced, the revisionist moved an application before the trial Court for an enquiry under Section 20 of the Juvenile Justice Act. The revisionist in support of his assertions that he is below the age of 16 years and is juvenile, filed High School Certificate. The trial Court, however, sought the medical opinion of C.M.O. who after radiological test, reported that the accused, Rajesh Kumar is aged about 19 years. The trial Court relying on the C.M.O. report held the''revisionist not juvenile delinquent and ordered to be tried with other coaccused. Hence, the revision.

Heard Sri Apul Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the revisionist and the learned A.G. A.

The short point involved in this revision is whether the date of birth mentioned in the High School certificate is preferable evidence as against the medical opinion of the C.M.O. The trial Court relying on 1991 ACC (Cri.) 438 (Daya Chandra v. Sahab Singh and others) observed that the medical opinion regarding the age is more reliable evidence than the entries in the scholar register etc. and held that the revisionist was above the age of 16 years on the date of occurrence and thereby rejected the application.

In the case of Pankaj Thpathi v. State of U.P (19% (33) ACC (H) 37), following the observations of the Hon''ble Supreme Court in Harpal Singh v. Himachal Pradesh (1987 Cr LJ (SC) and Bhooprai v. State of U.P.,AIR 1989 page 1329, this Court held that where, there is an inconsistency in the date of birth given in the school register and the medical opinion, the evidentiary value of the school register shall be taken into consideration as against the medical report because the medical report is nothing but an opinion based on the guesses.

In other cases, namely, Fanu alias Irfan v. State of U.P. (1990 ACC 690) and Janardan Pandey v. State of U.P, 1997 JIC 100 (Allahabad), this" Court has held that High School certificate shall be considered more authentic proof of the age in comparison to the medical opinion.

The Hon''ble Supreme Court in Santenu Mitra State of WB., 1999 (10) JIC 83 (SC), has observed that "once that entry was recorded by an official in performance of his duties, it cannot be doubted on mere argument that it was not contemporaneous with the date suggested by the appellant. It cannot be forgotten that the occurrence took place much after the entries were made in the school register. It could not have been expected on the date when the entry was made that the appellant would claim benefit thereof on the commission of some offence."

It is no body''s case that the High School certificate is not genuine and forged with the object to get benefit of the provisions of Juvenile Justice Act. Therefore, the date of birth mentioned in the High School certificate is more authentic and acceptable as against the medical opinion of the C.M.O. The learned trial Court has committed error in arriving at the decision that the applicant/revisionist was in the age of 19 years on the date of the occurrence.

The occurrence took place on 1741998. The age calculated from the date of birth i.e. 281982 of the revisionist would be 15 years and 8 months. Thus, he was below the age of 16years on the date of occurrence.

The revision is allowed. The order dated 1761999 passed by the VII Addl. Sessions Judge, Azamgarh is set aside. The revisionist shall not be tried with the other coaccused in the regular Court of jurisdiction. Revision allowed.