Criminal Rev. No.651 of 2009 (O&M) 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Criminal Rev. No.651 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: 20.3.2009 Mangal Singh ......Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and another .......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr.Gorav Kathuria, Advocate, for the petitioner. **** SABINA, J. This petition has been filed by Mangal Singh challenging order dated 6.3.2009 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad, whereby application filed by respondent No.2 for declaring her as a juvenile was allowed. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that respondent No.2 had failed to establish by leading cogent and convincing evidence that her date of birth was 6.11.1988 and, hence, the application filed by her was liable to be dismissed. In the present case FIR No.508 dated 22.9.1996 under Criminal Rev. No.651 of 2009 (O&M) 2 Sections 363, 366, 376 and 34 IPC was registered against respondent No.2 and three others. Occurrence had taken place on 22.9.1996. Learned trial Court has placed reliance on the Middle Examination Certificate (Annexure P-6). A perusal of the same reveals that the date of birth of Lubna, daughter of Sardar Ali and Ashma is 6.11.188. Annexure P-7 is the Matriculation Examination Certificate of respondent No.2, wherein also her date of birth is recorded as 6.11.1988. The mother of respondent No.2 was examined as AW-1, who deposed that respondent No.2 was born on 6.11.1988. The case of the prosecution, on the other hand, was that the date of birth of respondent No.2 was 15.12.1986. The same was registered vide registration No.2059 dated 29.12.1986 with the Registrar of Birth & Death, Registration Unit, Nagar Parishad, Palwal. Learned trial Court has observed that it would not be safe to rely upon the date of birth certificate relied upon by the accused or by the prosecution as the entries might have been manipulated in connivance with the Clerks of the Registrar of Birth & Death, Nagar Parishad, Palwal. In the date of birth certificate relied upon by the prosecution, a cutting was found over the name of Lubna-respondent No.2 to that of Ruby. Learned trial Court has rightly placed reliance on the Middle Examination and Matriculation Examination certificates Criminal Rev. No.651 of 2009 (O&M) 3 (Annexure P-6 and P-7 respectively), while taking the date of birth of Lubna as 6.11.1988. Learned trial Court has also placed reliance on character certificate issued by the Member of DRP Senior Secondary School, Palwal. The certificate regarding passing of 10+2 examination by Lubna-respondent No.2 was also taken into consideration by the learned trial Court. Learned trial Court further held that the date of birth of Ruby, eldest sister of respondent No.2, was 15.12.1986 and she had appeared in the examination in April 2003 through DRP Senior Secondary School, Palwal i.e. a year prior to the appearance in examination by Lubna-respondent No.2 in March, 2004. In these circumstances, learned trial Court had rightly came to the conclusion that respondent No.2 was less than 18 years of age at the time of alleged occurrence on 22.9.1996 and was rightly ordered to be tried by the Juvenile Justice Board, Faridabad. Hence, the impugned order calls for no interference. Accordingly, this revision petition is dismissed. (SABINA) JUDGE March 20, 2009 anita