VINOD KATARA versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

Citation: [2022] 9 S.C.R. 836 · Decided: 12-09-2022 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: DINESH MAHESHWARI · Disposal: Directions issued

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 9 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
836
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 9 S.C.R.
VINOD KATARA
v.
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH
(Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 121 of 2022)
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022
[DINESH MAHESHWARI AND J. B. PARDIWALA, JJ.]
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000:
ss. 3, 7A, 16, 20 – Applicability of the 2000 Act – Plea of juvenility
at belated stage – Determination of juvenility – On facts, writ
applicant while undergoing sentence of life imprisonment for offence
punishable u/s. 302/34 subjected to medical examination by the
State in pursuant of the judgment by the High Court wherein the
High Court directed the Juvenile Justice Boards to hold an enquiry
for determination of the age of prisoners languishing in jails who
claimed to have been juveniles in conflict with the law – Medical
Board certified that on the date of the commission of the alleged
offence, the writ applicant could have been around 15 years of age
– Thereafter, writ applicant obtained a Family Register Certificate
which shows his age as 14 years – Instant writ petition filed by the
applicant claiming juvenility – Held: In view of s. 7A, the plea of
juvenility could be raised in any court, at any stage even after the
final disposal of the Special Leave Petition – It is the documentary
evidence placed on record that plays a major role in determining
the age of a juvenile in conflict of law – It is only in the cases where
the documents or certificates placed on record by the accused in
support of his claim of juvenility are found to be fabricated or
manipulated, that the Court, the Juvenile Justice Board or the
Committee need to go for medical test for age determination – On
facts, the Family Register cannot be accepted as equivalent to
matriculation certificate to prove the age of the accused – Convict
was subjected to medical examination, however, the report on record
does not inspire much confidence – Despite all the odds against the
writ applicant, the matter to be looked into, in the larger interest of
justice – Sessions court directed to examine the claim of the writ
applicant to juvenility in regard with law within the stipulated period
– If the Family Register is found to be authentic and genuine,
[2022] 9 S.C.R. 836
836
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
837
ossification test report would not be required – Presiding Officer to
ascertain the authenticity and genuineness of the Family Register,
and the Sessions Court to conduct ossification test or any other
modern recognized method of age determination, and submit its
report – Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act,
2015 – s. 94 – Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children)
Rules, 2007 – rr. 3(1), 3(2) and 12(3)(b) – Constitution of India –
Arts. 32 and 39 – Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children)
Amendment Act, 2011.
Issuing directions, the Court
HELD: 1.1 It is well settled that in terms of Section 20 of
the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000,
in all cases where the accused was above 16 years but below 18
years of age on the date of occurrence, the proceedings pending
in the Court would continue and be taken to the logical end
subject to an exception that upon finding the juvenile to be guilty,
the Court would not pass an order of sentence against him but
the juvenile would be referred to the Board for appropriate orders
under the 2000 Act. From a reading of Section 7A what becomes
very obvious is that whenever a claim of juvenility is raised, an
inquiry has to be made and such inquiry would take place by
receiving evidence which would be necessary but not an affidavit
so as to determine the age of such person. [Paras 25, 28][856-F-
G; 857-D-E]
1.2 Sub-clause (3) of the Rule 12 of the Juvenile Justice
(Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007 clearly mandates
that while conducting an inquiry about the juvenility of an accused,
the Juvenile Justice Board would seek evidence by obtaining
the matriculation or equivalent certificates and in the absence
whereof the date of birth certificate from the school first attended
and in absence whereof the birth certificate given by a corporation
or a Municipal authority or a Panchayat. It is made clear by sub-
clause (b) that only in the absence of the said three documents,
medical information would be sought from a duly constituted
Medical Board which will declare the age of the juvenile or child.
Thus, it is only in the absence of the aforesaid documents that
the Juvenile Justice Board could have asked for m

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