IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.1649 of 2009 1. Rajakant Kumhar @ Raj Kant Prasad, S/O Balkhira Kumhar Vill- Barki Nanijore, P.S. Brahmpur (Nainijore), Distt. Buxar 2. Dharmendra Kumar @ Dharmendra Prasad S/O Balkhira Kumhar Vill- Barki Nanijore, P.S. Brahmpur (Nainijore), Distt. Buxar. ………Petitioners Versus The State of Bihar ………Opposite Party ----------- 2. 24.11.2011 The accused petitioners have preferred this revision application Section 53 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the order dated 17.07.2009 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C.V, Buxar in S.T.No.354/2008 by which the prayer for declaring him as a juvenile under Section 7 (A) of the Act and under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) has been rejected. The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that under Section 7 A of the Act, the claim of juvenility can be raised before any court, but the learned trial court has rejected the prayer of the petitioners on two grounds, firstly that only photocopy of the 2 certificate granted by the Headmaster of the school has been given and secondly, the petition has been filed at a belated stage. The claim of juvenility can be raised at any stage before any court and it is the trial court where the plea of juvenility has been raised. The court below should have made an inquiry in view of the petition filed by the petitioner under Section 7A of the Act. In Rule 12 (3) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007, the guidelines have been given to the court or the Board as the case may be for the consideration of the documents for considering the juvenility matter of a person. It is better to quote Rule 12 (3) : “12. Procedure to be followed in determining of age- (3) In every case concerning a child or juvenile in conflict with law, the age determination inquiry shall be conducted by the Court or the Board or, as the case may be, the Committee by seeking evidence by obtaining- (a) (i) the matriculation or equivalent certificates, if available; and in the absence whereof; (ii) the date of birth certificate from the school (other than a play school) first attended; and in the absence whereof; (iii) the birth certificate given by a corporation or a municipal authority or a panchayat; (b) and only in the absence of either (i), (ii) or (iii) of clause (a) above, 3 the medical opinion will be sought from a duly constituted Medical Board, which will declare the age of the juvenile or child. In case exact assessment of the age cannot be done, the Court or the Board or, as the case may be, the Committee, for the reasons to be recorded by them, may, if considered necessary, give benefit to be child or juvenile by considering his/her age on lower side within the margin of one year, and, while passing orders in such case shall, after taking into consideration such evidence as may be available, or the medical opinion, as the case may be, record a finding in respect of his age and either of the evidence specified in any of the clauses (a) (i), (ii), (iii) or in the absence whereof, clause (b) shall be the conclusive proof of the age as regards such child or the juvenile in conflict with law.” The learned counsel for the State could not controvert the contention of the petitioner. After hearing the learned counsel for both the parties and on perusal of the materials on the record, it appears that the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is correct. In view of Section 7A of the Act, the point of juvenility can be raised at any stage at any time. The petitioners have raised their claim of juvenility in the trial court itself, which should not have been rejected without holding an inquiry in view of the guidelines 4 provided in Rule 12 (3) of the Rules. The impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the learned trial court to consider the matter afresh in view of the provisions of Section 7A of the Act and the Rule 12 of the Rules and pass orders in accordance with law. In the result, this application is allowed. Let this order be communicated to the court below through fax at the cost of the petitioners. V.K. Pandey ( Amaresh Kumar Lal, J.)