RAVINDER SINGH GORKHI versus STATE OF U.P.

Citation: [2006] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 615 · Decided: 12-05-2006 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.B. SINHA · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

.,. 
RA VINDER SINGH GORKHI 
v. 
STATE OF U.P. 
MAY 12, 2006 
[S.B. SINHA AND P.P. NAOLEKAR, JJ.] 
Evidence Act, 1872 : 
Section 35-Entry in public record-Relevancy of-Age of accused-
School leaving certificate-Admissibility of-Accused said to have been born 
on 01-06-1963 was involved in a murder case which took place on 
15.05. 19 79-Trial court convicted all accused persons-High Court confirmed 
the conviction-Before the trial court the accused made a statement under 
S. 313 that he was aged 16 years-However, the trial court assessed his age 
as 18 years-Before Supreme Court far the first time accused claimed that 
A 
B 
c 
the was entitled to the benefit of S. 2(4) of the U.P. Children Act-Matter 
D 
remitted to Sessions Judge for determination of the age of the accused-
Relying upon the school leaving certificate the Sessions Judge held that he 
was a minor on the date of occurrence i.e. 15.05. 1979-Correctness a/-
Held : Determination of the date of birth of a person before a court of law 
whether in a civil proceeding or a criminal proceeding, would depend upon 
E 
the facts and circumstances of each case-Section 35 would be attracted 
both in civil and criminal proceedings-Before a document is admissible in 
evidence the different conditions laid down in S. 35 must be fulfilled-It has 
not been shown whether any register was maintained in the school at all-
F urther the original register was not produced-In the instant case, the 
certificate was issued only for the purpose of the case-The accused never 
seriously projected that he was a minor on the date of occurrence-Report 
of Sessions Judge rejected-Conviction upheld-UP. Children Act, 195 I, S. 
2(4). 
F 
The appellant-accused was said to have been born on 01.06.196:3. 
G 
He was involved in a criminal case relating to a murder which took 
place on 15.05.1979. The allegation against the appellant was that he 
along with his father and others attacked the deceased with a country-
made pistol and knife. The trial court convicted all the accused persons 
of commission of murder. The High Court confirmed the conviction. 
615 
H 
616 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2006] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 
A 
Hence the appeal. 
B 
During the trial, in his statement under, Section 313 of the Code 
of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the appellant stated that he was aged 16 
years whereas the court assessed his age to be 18 years. Before this 
Court for the first time, the appellant claimed that he was entitled to 
the benefit of Section 2(4) of the Uttar Pradesh Children Act, 1951. The 
question in regard to the appellant's age was referred to the Sessions 
Judge. Relying upon the school leaving certificate wherein the date of 
birth of the appellant was recorded to be 01.06.1963, he was held to be 
a minor on the date of occurrence i.e. 15.05.1979. The school leaving 
C certificate was said to have been issued in the year 1998. A perusal of 
the said certificate would show that the appellant was said to have been 
admitted on 01.08.1967 and his name was struck off from the roll of the 
D 
E 
institution on 06.05.1972. The said school leaving certificate was not in 
the ordinary course of business of the school. 
The following question arose before the Court:-
Whether a school leaving certificate purported to have been issued 
by the authorities of a primary school would attract the provision of 
Section 35 of the Evidence Act, 1872? 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
HELD : 1. There cannot be any doubt whatsoever that the 
certificate was issued for the purpose of the case. The father of the 
F 
appellant was also an accused. He was described as 'Surender Pal 
Singh'. The appellant had also been described as 'Ravinder Pal Singh 
S/o Surender Pal Singh'. Before this Court the father's name has been 
described as 'Surender Singh', the appellant's name has been shown as 
'Ravinder Singh Gorkhi'; whereas the name of the student in the 
G 
leaving certificate has been shown as 'Ravinder Pal Singh'. (624-E, F) 
2. Determination of the date of birth of a person before a court 
of law whether in a civil proceeding or a criminal proceeding, would 
depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case. Such a date of 
birth has determined on the basis of the materials on record. It will be 
H 
a matter of appreciation of evidence adduced by the parties. Different 
... 
R. S. GORKHI v. ST A TE 
617 
standards having regard to the provision of Section 35 of the Evidence 
A 
Act, 1872 cannot be applied in a c

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