IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Appeal No. 23 of 2002 Sanjay @ Sanju ….…… Appellant. Versus State of Uttarakhand ………. Respondent Mr. K.S. Verma, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Amit Bhatt, Addl. Government Advocate for the State / respondent. Date of Order: 07.12.2011 Hon’ble Barin Ghosh, C.J. Hon’ble U.C. Dhyani, J. Miscellaneous Application No. 3570 of 2011 Appellant herein has been convicted of committing murder of victim by using a country-made revolver, as has been established in course of trial before the Additional Sessions Judge, III (F.T.C.), Dehradun in Sessions Trial No. 180 of 1997. After the present appeal was admitted on an application having been made, appellant has been enlarged on bail. The appeal was heard on its merit and judgment was reserved. 2. Subsequent thereto, an application was filed by the appellant contending that at about the time of incident, he was a juvenile and, accordingly, he could not be tried in the manner he had been tried by the Additional Sessions Judge. This application was entertained by the Court and, accordingly, while rendering of the reserved judgment was stayed, appellant was sent for determination of his age before the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court. Before the Registrar (Judicial), appellant has produced birth certificate, issued by Nagar Palika Parishad, Rishikesh, whereby it was certified that the appellant was born on 19th February, 1983. Registrar (Judicial) had also sent the appellant for ossification test. The Chief Medical Officer, Nainital has submitted a report after such test was conducted, whereby and under, he has opined that at the time of ossification test of the appellant, he was about 25-30 years old. The incident in question took place on 5th July, 1997. In terms of the medical report, even if it is considered that the appellant was 30 years old at the time of his ossification test, even then he would be less than 18 years as on 5th July, 1997. 2 According to the birth certificate, which has been verified from the Nagar Palika Parishad, Rishikesh and found to be genuine, appellant was less than 18 years as on the date of incident. 3. We, accordingly, allow the application of the appellant and hold that the appellant could not be tried in the manner he was tried by the Additional Sessions Judge and on that ground alone, set aside the judgment and order under appeal. We, however, remit the matter to the Juvenile Justice Board, Dehradun, who shall deal with the matter henceforth in accordance with law. The appellant is directed to be present before the Juvenile Justice Board, Dehradun with a certified copy of this order on 3rd January, 2012, whereafter, the matter shall be dealt with only by the Juvenile Justice Board, Dehradun. The prosecution is directed to ensure that the records and papers in connection with the incident in question are placed before the Juvenile Justice Board, Dehradun at the appropriate time. (U.C. Dhyani, J.) (Barin Ghosh, C.J.) 07.12.2011 07.12.2011 Amit