ASHWANI KUMAR SAXENA versus STATE OF M.P.

Citation: [2012] 10 S.C.R. 540 · Decided: 13-09-2012 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 8 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
f2012J 10 S.C.R. 540 
ASHWANI KUMAR SAXENA 
v. 
STATE OF M.P. 
(Criminal Appeal No. 1403 of 2012) 
SEPTEMBER 13, 2012 
[K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN AND MADAN B. LOKUR, JJ.] 
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 
2000 - s. 7A rlw. r. 12 of Juvenile Justice Rules, 2007 -
C Inquiry under - Nature, scope and ambit of - Claim of 
juvenility - Procedure to be followed - For determination of 
age - Held: Age determination inquiry is contemplated u/s. 
7A rlw r. 12 - Therefore, such inquiry is an inquiry under the 
Act and to be conducted following the procedure u/r. 12 and 
D not following the procedure under Cr.P. C. - Age to be 
determined initially on the basis of the documents/certificates 
as indicated in r. 12(3)(a)(i)(ii) and (iii) - The question of 
obtaining medical opinion arises only if the documents/ 
certificates are unavailable or found to be fabricated or 
E manipulated - Once the court passes order determining the 
age of the juvenile following the procedure laid down u/s. 7 A 
rlw r. 12, that shall be conclusive proof as regards the age of 
that juvenile - In the instant case, the court examined the 
question of juvenility as if it was a criminal trial or inquiry under 
F Cr.P.C - The document produced to prove the date of birth 
was not refuted or rebutted by the opposite party- Hence rule 
12(3)(a)(i)(ii) is complied with - The court wrongly ordered for 
medial opinion disbelieving the documents in support of date 
of birth of the juvenile - Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection 
G of Children) Rules, 2007 -
r. 12 -
Code of Criminal 
Procedure, 1973. 
Penal Code, 1860- s. 320 rlw s.27 of Arms Act, 1959 -
Prosecution under -
Conviction and sentence of life 
imprisonment by trial court - Appeal pending before High 
H 
540 
ASHWANI KUMAR SAXENA v. STATE OF M.P. 
541 
Court - In the meantime, in an application ulss. 6 and 7 of A 
Juvenile Justice Act, Supreme Court finding that the accused 
was a juvenile - Sentence set aside - Direction to High Court 
to place the records before Juvenile Justice Board for 
awarding sentence in accordance with the Act of 2000 -
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 
B 
- Arms Act, 1959 - s. 27. 
Words and Phrases: 
'inquiry: 'enquiry', 'investigation' and 'trial' - Meaning of, 
in the context of Cr.P.C. and Juvenile Justice (Care and C 
Protection of Children) Act, 2000. 
The appellant accused was prosecuted uls. 302 IPC 
rlw s. 27 of Arms Act During pendency of the trial, he 
moved an application ulss. 6 and 7 of Juvenile Justice o 
(Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, claiming to 
be a juvenile (i.e. below 18 years age on the date of the 
Incident). In support of his date of birth, he produced 
mark-sheets of eighth standard and Higher Secondary 
Board examinations. 
The court directed Ossification Test. As per the 
medical reports, the age of the accused was not below 
18 years on the date of the Incident. The court 
disbelieving the school records and relying on the 
E 
medical evidence, dismissed the application. 
F 
Appellate court called for the original school records 
In order to ascertain the basis for entry of the date of birth, 
but disbelieving the same, dismissed the appeal. The 
order was confirmed by the High Court. Hence the G 
present appeal. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1.1 Courts below, while dealing with the claim 
of juvenility have not properly understood the scope of H 
542 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2012] 10 S.C.R. 
A the Juvenile justice (Car~ and Protection of Children) Act, 
2000 particularly, meaning and content of Section 7A of 
the Act read with Rule 12 of Juvenile Justice (Care and 
Protection of Children) Rules, 2007. Section 7A, obliges 
the court only to make an inquiry, not an investigation or a 
B trial, an inquiry not under Cr.P.C. but under the Act. 
Criminal Courts, JJ Board, Committees etc., proceed as 
if they are conducting a trial, inquiry, enquiry or 
Investigation as per Cr.P.C. Statute requires the Court or 
the Board only to make an 'inquiry' and in what manner 
c that Inquiry has to be conducted is provided in 2007 
Rules. Section 7 A has used the expression ~court shall 
make an inquiry", "take such evidence as may be 
necessary" and "but not an affidavit". The Court or the 
Board can accept as evidence something more than an 
0 affidavit i.e. the Court or the Board can accept 
documents, certificates etc. as evidence need not be oral 
evidence. Rule 12 which has to be rea

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.