LexJODHBIR SINGH versus STATE OF PUNJAB
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B c (2012) 11 S.C.R. 230 JODHBIR SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB (Criminal Appeal No. 1971 of 2012) DECEMBER 3, 2012 [K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN AND DIPAK MISRA, JJ.] JUVENILE JUSTICE (CARE AND PROTECTION OF CHILDREN) ACT, 2000: s. 7-A read with r.12 of 2007 Rules - Claim of juvenility- App/ication by appellant that on the date of commission of alleged offence he was a juvenile - Certificate issued by Government High School indicating the appellant as a 0 juvenile on the date of offence - Court of Session holding the appellant not to be a juvenile - High Court dismissing appellant's revision - Held: In a case where genuineness of the school leaving certificate has not been questioned, Court of Session and High Court were not justified in placing reliance on certain statements made by mother of accused E in cross-examination - Court of Session also committed an error in placing reliance on the certificate issued by the village Chowkidar - When Jaw gives prime importance to the date of birth certificate issued by the school first attended, genuineness of which is not disputed, there is no question of F placing reliance on the certificate issued by the village Chowkidar - The appellant was a juvenile on the date of incident and has to be tried by the Juvenile Justice Board - Court of Session is directed to make over the files to the Juvenile Justice Board to proceed with the trial, so far as the G appellant is concerned. H An FIR for offences punishable under the NDPS Act, 1985 was registered against the appellant and another 230 JODHBIR SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB 231 person on 26.09.2010, stating that they were A apprehended the same day with 2 kg heroin. The appellant filed an application before the Special Judge claiming that he was a juvenile on the date of the alleged offence. He produced a certificate issued by the Government High School showing his date of birth as B 20.07 .1996. The Special Judge inter a/ia held that the mother of the applicant was not able to state the correct age of the applicant; that the certificate issued by the School and the record of the Chowkidar register were contrary; and that the School Certificate seemed to be c maneuvered only to get the benefit of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000. The High Court also rejected the revision of the appellant. In the instant appeal, in pursuance to the order dated 29.08.2012 passed by the Court, an affidavit was filed by D the Dy. Superintendent of Police, who examined the genuineness of the Certificate dated 5.4.2006 issued by the State Council for Research and Training, Punjab, Chandigarh and the certificate dated 19.10.2000, issued by the Gcvernment High School, both showing the date E of birth of the appellant as 20.07.1996. The Head Master, Government High School also certified the genuineness of the documents on the basis of the record. Allowing the appeal, the Court F HELD: 1.1. It is significant to notice that the genuineness of the certificate dated 05.04.2006 issued by the State Council of Education Research and Training Punjab, Chandigarh and the certificate issued by G Government High School and the admission and withdrawal register of Government High School has not been questioned. [Para 11] [237-G] 1.2. In a case where genuineness of the school H 232 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2012] 11 S.C.R. A leaving certificate has not been questioned, the Court of Session and the High Court were not justified in placing reliance on certain statements made by the mother of the accused in the cross-examination. The Court of Session also committed an error in placing reliance on the B certificate issued by the village Chowkidar who was examined as RW2. When law gives prime importance to the date of birth certificate issued by the school first attended, the genuineness of which is not disputed, there is no question of placing reliance on the certificate issued c by the village Chowkidar. [Para 13] [238-H; 239-A-B] Ashwani Kumar Saxena v. State of M.P. (2012) 9 SCC 750 - relied on 1.3. This Court, therefore, holds that the appellant D was a juvenile on the date of the incident and has to be tried by the Juvenile Justice Board. The Court of Session is directed to make over the files to the Juvenile Justice Board to proceed with the trial, so far as the appellant is concerned. [para 14] [239-D-E] E Case Law Reference: (2012) 9 sec 150 relied on
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.