Criminal Revision No.1235 of 2010 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No. 1235 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision:May 04, 2010 Pala Ram ...........Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ..........Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Sabina Present: Mr.S.S.Kharab, Advocate for the petitioner. ** Sabina, J. This revision petition is filed against the order dated 5.3.2010 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Panipat affirming order of the trial Court dated 19.9.2009 whereby both the accused Arvind Kumar and Deepak Kumar were declared juveniles. The brief facts of the case, as noticed by the trial Court in para 2 of its judgment, are as under:- “2. Brief facts of the case are that present case was registered against Deepak son of Satbir Singh and Arvind son of Ramesh on the allegations of Commission of murder of Sandeep, student of 10+1 and challan was presented against both the accused treating Criminal Revision No.1235 of 2010 (O&M) 2 them as juvenile by the Investigating Officer. Thereafter, copies of challan documents supplied to the accused and both the accused were served with notice of accusation and case was adjourned for prosecution evidence. Feeling aggrieved with this, complainant went in appeal and vide order dated 1.12.2008 passed by the Court of Ms. Sarita Gupta, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Panipat the Court of Juvenile Justice Board is directed to hold an enquiry with regard to age of both the juveniles, record a finding as to that effect and after that to proceed with the case.” Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the entry in the School register did not have much evidentiary value to prove the age of the person in the absence of material on the basis of which the age was recorded. The Chief Judicial Magistrate has erred in declaring the respondents Deepak Kumar and Arvind Kumar as juveniles relying upon their examination certificates. In support of his arguments, learned counsel has placed reliance on Jyoti Prakash Rai @ Jyoti Prakash vs. State of Biha r 2008(2)RCR (Criminal) 194 and Babloo Pasi vs. State of Jharkhand and another 2008(4)RCR(Criminal) 756. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the opinion that no ground for interference is made out. Respondents-Arvind Kumar and Deepak Kumar, in order to establish that they were juveniles on the date of occurrence i.e. 7.8.2008, proved on record their certificates of qualification. As per mark sheet issued by the Board of School Education Haryana, the date of birth of Arvind Kumar is 14.7.1993. The date of birth of respondent Deepak Kumar Criminal Revision No.1235 of 2010 (O&M) 3 is 5.5.1993 as per certificate of qualification of middle standard examination issued by the Board of School Education Haryana. Since the said certificates have been issued by the Board of School Education, Haryana, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate rightly placed reliance on the same while coming to the conclusion that the respondents Arvind Kumar and Deepak Kumar were juveniles on the day of occurrence. The judgments relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner fail to advance the case of the petitioner as they are based on different facts. No ground for interference is made out. Dismissed. (Sabina) Judge May 04, 2010 arya