Crl. Revision No. 2511 of 2010 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Revision No. 2511 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: September 14, 2010 Jobanpreet Singh ........Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ........Respondent ****** CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr. A.P.S. Srawaan, Advocate, for the petitioner. SABINA, J. Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 38 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 1986 challenging the order dated 13.8.2010, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Ferozepur, whereby the order dated 6.3.2010 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Ferozepur declaring the petitioner a juvenile was set aside. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that once the petitioner had been declared as a juvenile, the said order could not be set aside later on the basis of another certificate relied upon by the prosecution. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the opinion that the instant petition deserves dismissal. Vide order dated 6.3.2010, petitioner was declared as a Crl. Revision No. 2511 of 2010 (O&M) 2 juvenile by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Ferozepur. A perusal of the same reveals that an application was moved by the petitioner alleging that he was a minor as his date of birth was 28.4.1992 as per his matriculation certificate. The Station House Officer was directed to verify the age of the petitioner. An application was moved by the petitioner on 3.3.2010 and vide order dated 6.3.2010 petitioner was declared as a juvenile. A perusal of the said order further reveals that the prosecution had sought more time to verify the factum of age of the petitioner. Thereafter, prosecution moved an application that an inquiry be held for determination of age of the petitioner, but the said application was dismissed vide order dated 28.5.2010. Prosecution then filed an appeal and the learned Sessions Judge, Ferozepur vide the impugned order dated 13.8.2010 has set aside the order dated 6.3.2010 as well as the order dated 28.5.2010 and has directed the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Ferozepur to conduct a fresh inquiry qua the age of the petitioner. In appeal the prosecution has placed reliance on the date of birth certificate of the petitioner as per which the date of birth of the petitioner is 28.4.1989. In the present case, it is evident that the learned Judicial Magistrate at the first instance without affording proper opportunity to the prosecution passed the order declaring the petitioner as a juvenile. The prosecution had sought more time to verify the age of the petitioner. However, the order was passed by the Magistrate on 6.3.2010 on an application moved by the petitioner on 3.3.2010 declaring him a juvenile and has thus moved in a hurried manner. Crl. Revision No. 2511 of 2010 (O&M) 3 In these circumstances, as proper opportunity was not afforded to the prosecution to establish the age of the petitioner, manifest injustice has occurred. Accordingly, the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge suffers from no illegality or irregularity and calls for no interference. Dismissed. (SABINA) September 14, 2010 JUDGE Anand