Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Vinod Katara, was convicted for murder committed on 10th September 1982 and sentenced to life imprisonment. His appeal was dismissed by the Allahabad High Court on 4th March 2016, and his special leave petition was dismissed by the Supreme Court on 16th August 2016. Subsequently, in a PIL, the High Court directed Juvenile Justice Boards to determine the age of convicts who might have been juveniles. Pursuant to this, the petitioner was medically examined on 10th December 2021, and the Medical Board opined his age as around 56 years. Based on this, the petitioner claimed he was about 15 years old on the date of the incident and filed a writ petition seeking a declaration of juvenility. The Supreme Court directed the Sessions Court, Agra to conduct an inquiry. The Additional District and Sessions Judge, after examining evidence including school records and a family register, concluded that the petitioner's date of birth was 2nd July 1960, making him a major at the time of the offence. The court found the family register to be forged and the ossification test unreliable for age determination after 25 years. The Supreme Court upheld the inquiry report, dismissed the petition, and rejected the claim of juvenility.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Juvenility Claim - Determination of Age - Section 94 Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 - The court considered the claim of a life convict that he was a juvenile on the date of murder. The inquiry officer found the family register forged and relied on contemporaneous school record showing date of birth as 2nd July 1960. The Supreme Court held that the ossification test is unreliable after age 25 and the school record is reliable. The claim of juvenility was rejected. (Paras 16-18) B) Evidence - Family Register - Forgery - The family register produced by the petitioner was found to be forged as the original register was not available and the document was issued recently. The court held that such document cannot be relied upon. (Para 16) C) Medical Jurisprudence - Ossification Test - Age Determination - The Medical Board opined that estimation of age based on X-ray becomes uncertain after age 25. The court held that the ossification test report cannot be the sole basis for determining juvenility when contemporaneous school record is available. (Paras 7, 18)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner was a juvenile on the date of the incident (10th September 1982) and entitled to relief under the Juvenile Justice Act.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the writ petition, holding that the petitioner was not a juvenile on the date of the incident. The inquiry report was accepted, and the claim of juvenility was rejected.
Law Points
- Juvenility claim
- ossification test reliability
- contemporaneous school record
- family register forgery
- Section 94 JJ Act 2015
