SHAH NAWAJ versus STATE OF U.P. & ANR.

Citation: [2011] 9 S.C.R. 859 · Decided: 05-08-2011 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: P. SATHASIVAM · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 3 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2011] 9 S.C.R. 859 
·•. 
SHAH NAWAJ 
A 
v. 
STATE OF U.P. & ANR. 
(Criminal Appeal No. 1531 of 2011) 
J 
AUGUST 05, 2011 
B 
[P. SATHASIVAM AND DR. B.S. CHAUHAN, JJ.] 
Juvenile Justice/Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 
2007 - Claim of juvenility - FIR lodged against appellant for 
commission of offence u/ss. 302 and 307 /PC - Application c 
filed by appellant's mother before the Juvenile Justice Board 
that he was a minor at the time of the alleged occurrence on 
.. 
basis of her son's school leaving certificate - Application 
,> 
allowed - Session Judge set aside the order passed by the 
Board - Said 'order upheld by the High Court on the ground D 
of absence of any matriculation or equivalent certificate - On 
,appeal held: Documents furnished-mark sheet of High 
School Examination issued by the School Authority and the 
School Leaving Certificate issued by the Preparatory School 
clearly show that the date of birth of the appellant was noted 
E 
as 18.06.1989 - Entry relating to date of birth entered in the 
mark sheet as also school leaving certificate are valid proof 
.• 
of evidence for determination of age of an accused person -
Date of birth mentioned in the High School mark sheet 
produced by the appellant has duly been coffoborated by the 
School Leaving Certificate of the appellant of Class X and has 
F 
also been proved by the statement of the clerk and the 
principal of the School - Mother of the appellant corroborated 
his academic records which clearly depose his date of birth 
"" 
as 18. 06. 1989 and the appellant was a juvenile on the date 
G 
of occurrence as alleged in the FIR - Thus, the Additional 
Sessions Judge and the High Court erred in determining the 
age of the appellant ignoring the date of birth mentioned in 
those documents which is illegal, erroneous and contrary to 
859 
H 
860 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2011] 9 S.C.R. 
A the Rules - Decision of the Board is upheld and that of the 
Additional Sessions Judge and the High Court are set aside 
- Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 
2000. 
8 
An FIR was lodged against the appellant and others 
for commission of offence under Sections 302 and 307 
IPC. The mother of the appellant filed an application 
before the Juvenile Justice Board that the minor was a 
juvenile on the alleged date of occurrence. The witnesses 
C were cross-examined and the Board declared the 
appellant juvenile under the provisions of the Juvenile 
Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000. The 
complainant-wife of deceased filed an appeal and the 
order passed by the Board was set aside. The appellant 
filed criminal revision. The High Court dismissed the 
D revision on the ground that in the absence of any 
matriculation or equivalent certificate and the language 
used in Rule 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and 
Protection of Children) Rules, 2007 was with reference to 
only certificate and not the mark sheet. Therefore, the 
E appellant filed the instant appeal. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1.1 Rule 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and 
F Protection of Children) Rules, 2007 which was brought 
in pursuance of the Act describes four categories of 
evidence which have been provided in which preference 
has been given to school certificate over the medical 
report. Rule 12 of the Rules categorically envisages that 
the medical opinion from the medical board should be· 
G sought only when the matriculation certificate or school 
certificate or any birth certificate issued by a corporation 
or by any Panchayat or municipality is not available. 
[Paras 19 and 21] [873-B-C; 874-B] 
H 
SHAH NAWAJ v. STATE OF U.P. & ANR. 
861 
1.2 The documents furnished mark sheet of High 
A 
School Examination issued by the School Authority and 
the School leaving certificate dated 11.07 .2007 issued by 
the Preparatory School clearly show that the date of birth 
of the appellant was noted as 18.06.1989. The entry 
relating to date of birth entered in the mark sheet is one 
B 
of the valid proof of evidence for determination of age of 
an accused person. The School Leaving Certificate is 
also a valid proof in determining the age of the accused 
person. Further, the date of birth mentioned in the High 
School mark sheet produced by the appellant has duly c 
been corroborated by the School Leaving Certificate of 
the appellant of Class X and has also been proved by the 
statement of the clerk of the School and recorded by the 
Board. The date o

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