Crl. Misc. No. M-38509 of 2011 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-38509 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision : 22.12.2011 Kapil …Petitioner Versus State of Haryana …Respondent ………. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH -.- 1. Whether Reporters of local newspapers may be allowed to see judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr. Vikas Kumar, Advocate, for the petitioner. *** Alok Singh, J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that date of birth of the petitioner-accused is 07.09.1993 as mentioned in Secondary Matriculation Certificate (Annexure P-2), issued by Board of School Education Haryana. Date of occurrence is 18.07.2010, therefore, petitioner was juvenile on the date of occurrence and even today he is juvenile. Learned counsel while placing reliance on the judgment of learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of Satinder Singh Vs. State of U.T. Chandigarh and another, reported in 2011 (2) R.C.R. (Criminal) 89, has argued that offence punishable under Section 376(2)(g) IPC does not find place under sub-section (4) of Section 82 Cr.P.C., therefore, petitioner was wrongly declared proclaimed offender. He has further argued that on the basis of the same evidence other co-accused have already been acquitted by the learned trial court vide Crl. Misc. No. M-38509 of 2011 (O&M) 2 judgment (Annexure P-3). Learned counsel has further stated that petitioner shall surrender/appear before the trial court on 20.01.2012 and shall move an application stating date of birth of the accused-petitioner to declare him juvenile as per Rule 12 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules 2007 (in short ‘the Rules’). Learned counsel has further stated that petitioner has no past criminal history, therefore, he should be enlarged on bail. Notice of motion. Mr. Gaurav Dhir, learned Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, has accepted notice on behalf of respondent. Mr. Gaurav Dhir, learned Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, has stated that as per Rule 12 of the Rules, date of birth shown in the matriculation certificate shall be taken into account first and the inquiry shall be held by the court below as per Rule 12 of the Rules. However, Mr. Dhir has stated that during the pendency of inquiry to be held by the court under Rule 12 of the Rules, it should be left to the trial court to take decision as to whether petitioner should be released on bail during the pendency of the inquiry under Rule 12 of the Rules. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that if the plea of juvenility is taken before any court at any stage, court is bound to hold inquiry as per Rule 12 of the Rules. I find force in the submission of learned counsel for the parties that matriculation certificate shall be given weightage while determining the age of juvenile as per Rule 12 (3) (a) (i) of the Rules. Since petitioner is ready and willing to surrender/appear before the trial court, therefore, present petition is being disposed of with the direction that petitioner shall appear before the trial court on or before Crl. Misc. No. M-38509 of 2011 (O&M) 3 20.01.2012. If application seeking juvenility is moved annexing therewith the date of birth certificate as provided under Rule 12, the same shall be disposed of by the trial court preferably within 90 days thereafter. If an application seeking bail under Section 12 of the Act is moved, petitioner shall be enlarged on bail to the satisfaction of learned trial court during the period inquiry is held on the question of juvenility. ( Alok Singh ) December 22, 2011 Judge Anand