Crim.WP 829/10 - 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.829/2010 Balu @ Raosaheb s/o Vyankatrao Pawade, aged 27 yrs., occu.student, r/o Navin Wadi, Nanded, at present in Central Jail, Nashik. ...Petitioner.. Versus The State of Maharashtra. ...Respondent... ..... Shri Vijay Sharma, Advocate for petitioner. Shri K.S. Patil, AGP for respondent. ..... CORAM: P.V. HARDAS & A.V. POTDAR, JJ. DATE: 16.12.2010 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per P.V. Hardas, J.) : 1] Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. Crim.WP 829/10 - 2 - 2] The petitioner, who claims that he was less than 18 years on 3.1.2001 when the offence punishable u/s 302 of the Indian Penal Code is alleged to have been committed by the present petitioner along with other accused. The petitioner was put to trial and accordingly came to be convicted along with the other accused for offence punishable u/s 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The appeal filed by the present petitioner also came to be dismissed. The petitioner, it appears, had submitted an application before the Ad Hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Nanded, which came to be rejected by order dated 10.12.2009. The trial Court found that the certificate produced by the petitioner was in respect of date of birth, which was recorded as 13.4.1983, whereas in the Grampanchayat records, his date of birth was recorded as 12.4.1983. The trial Court found that in the light of such discrepant evidence and the fact that the petitioner had not adduced satisfactory evidence, the trial Court rejected the application of the petitioner. This matter has, therefore, been filed before us questioning the correctness of the order passed by the trial Court. 3] The petitioner in this petition has placed reliance on the school leaving certificate in which the date of birth of the petitioner is recorded as 13.4.1983. It appears that in the Grampanchayat record, the date of birth of the petitioner is recorded as 12.4.1983. On notice of this petition being issued to the respondents, they have filed their affidavit in reply. In the affidavit in reply, it i stated that since the date of birth recorded in the Grampanchayat records does not tally with the Crim.WP 829/10 - 3 - date of birth recorded in the school leaving certificate, the petitioner is not entitled to be extended the benefit under the Act. It is also urged before us that the petitioner had not raised any plea of the fact that he was a minor i.e. below the age of 18 years when the offence is alleged to have been committed. 4] According to us, this controversy regarding the exact date of birth of the petitioner an be resolved by remitting the matter to the Juvenile Justice Board. We accordingly allow this petition, quash and set aside the order of the trial Court and direct the concerned Juvenile Justice Board to decide the matter as expeditiously as possible, giving opportunity to the petitioner to lead evidence. Rule is, thus, made absolute on the above terms with no order as to costs. (A.V. POTDAR, J.) (P.V. HARDAS, J.) ndk/cr1612107