Crl.Misc No M- 13583 of 2010 Jassi alias Jasmeet alais Pathar v. State of Punjab PRESENT: Mr.Rakesh Kumar, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. R.S.Rawat, AAG, Punjab. Mr.D.S.Sandhu, Advocate, for the complainant. *** The present petition has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. read with Section 6(2) of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (for short “the Act”) in case FIR No. 37 dated 7.2.2010 under Sections 363/366-A/376 IPC which were added subsequently, at Police Station Sultanpur Lodhi, District Kapurthala. Notice of motion was issued in this case on 10.5.2010. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the case and his case for regular bail was wrongly rejected and has not been granted the concession of regular bail being a juvenile. As per case of the complainant, who is mother of Navjot Kaur, age of her daughter was 15 years and she was taken away by accused Jassi with intention to marry her forcibly. Statement of the complainant was recorded on 7.2.2010. Bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. read with Section 6(2) of the Act was rejected by the Sessions Judge, Kapurthala on the ground that accused was 17-1/2 years of age and was juvenile and had committed rape upon a girl of 14 years. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that petitioner should have been released on bail being juvenile in view of various judgments and under Section 12 of the Act. During the course of hearing, the date of birth of the accused was verified on the basis of certificate issued by the Registrar Births and Deaths as date of birth of the petitioner was mentioned as 4.11.1989 in the Crl.Misc No M- 13583 of 2010 [2] Certificate issued by Government Senior Secondary School, Dudwandi, Kapurthala. The petitioner was juvenile on the basis of Certificate issued by Registrar, Births and Deaths whereas as per Certificate issued by the School, the petitioner was not found juvenile. This fact was verified by the Investigating Officer and on the basis of inquiry, it was found that the petitioner produced the wrong certificate to show himself juvenile and FIR No. 118 dated 6.8.2010 was registered against father of the petitioner on the complaint filed by Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Kapurthala for producing fake certificate showing wrong date of birth of the petitioner. In view of the fact that father of petitioner submitted a fake certificate showing his wrong date of birth, the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of bail being juvenile. Moreover, serious allegations are there against the petitioner as he is alleged to have committed rape upon a minor girl of 14 years of age when she had taken a lift from him for going to school. Moreover, the petitioner is in custody only for the last 2-1/2 months. Keeping in view the seriousness of the offence and specific allegation against the petitioner, the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of regular bail. The petition being devoid of any merit is dismissed. (DAYA CHAUDHARY) August 16, 2010 JUDGE raghav