Case Note & Summary
The appeal challenged an order of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana dated 30.07.2019, which set aside an order declaring the appellant a juvenile in conflict with law and ordered him to stand trial as an adult. The appellant was accused in an occurrence on 18.01.2011 involving waylaying a car, snatching Rs. 22 lacs, and a fatal shooting. During trial, the appellant filed an application on 07.10.2014 claiming juvenility based on school records showing date of birth as 13.05.1993. The Additional Sessions Judge initially declared him juvenile on 09.01.2015, but the High Court remanded the matter on 04.05.2016. After remand, the Additional Sessions Judge relied on an ossification test report dated 13.05.2016, which assessed age as 23-24 years, but gave benefit to determine age as 16 years 8 months and 5 days, plus an additional year under Rule 12(3)(b), declaring him juvenile. The High Court set this aside, relying on a family register under The U.P. Panchayat Raj (Maintenance of Family Register) Rules, 1970. The Supreme Court considered the procedure under Rule 12(3)(b) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007, which prioritizes certain documents over medical opinion. The appellant relied on a birth certificate, school leaving certificate, and ossification test report, while the State relied on the family register. The court found the birth certificate unreliable as it was issued after the application and not registered timely under the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969. The school leaving certificate was deemed unreliable due to discrepancies in school existence and issuance. The ossification test was noted to vary individually. The court upheld the High Court's order, finding the appellant's documents procured and unreliable, thus he was not entitled to juvenility status. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the High Court's decision.
Headnote
A) Juvenile Justice - Age Determination - Procedure Under Rule 12(3)(b) Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007 - The Supreme Court examined the procedure for determining age of a juvenile in conflict with law as per Rule 12(3)(b) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007, which prioritizes matriculation certificate, school first attended certificate, or birth certificate, with medical opinion only in absence of these. The court held that the appellant's documents were unreliable and procured, thus the medical opinion was not conclusive. (Paras 4-6) B) Evidence Law - Documentary Evidence - Reliability of Birth Certificate - Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969, Sections 8(1)(a) and 10(1)(i) - The court found the birth certificate issued on 19.11.2014 unreliable as it was obtained after filing the application under Section 7A of the Juvenile Justice Act on 07.10.2014 and registered many years after birth, not within the prescribed time under the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969. Held that such certificate cannot be relied upon for age determination. (Paras 8-10) C) Evidence Law - Documentary Evidence - Reliability of School Leaving Certificate - The school leaving certificate was deemed unreliable as the school's existence was disputed, the certificate was issued after the school shifted villages, and the admission form was a loose sheet without proper authentication. The court held it was a procured document for proving juvenility. (Paras 11-14) D) Medical Jurisprudence - Age Determination - Ossification Test - The Medical Board's ossification test report indicated age 23-24 years, but the court noted such tests vary based on individual characteristics and are not conclusive when other documents are unreliable. The Additional Sessions Judge had used this to grant benefit, but the Supreme Court upheld the High Court's rejection. (Paras 15-17)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellant was a juvenile in conflict with law on the date of the incident, and whether the High Court correctly set aside the order declaring him as such
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the High Court's order setting aside the declaration of the appellant as a juvenile in conflict with law, thus he is to stand trial as an adult
Law Points
- Procedure for age determination under Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules
- 2007
- Rule 12(3)(b)
- Registration of Births and Deaths Act
- 1969
- Sections 8(1)(a) and 10(1)(i)
- reliability of documents for age proof
- medical opinion as last resort
