IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.1405 of 2010 LAKSHMAN MAHTO @ LAKSHMAN CHOUDHARY …PETITIONER Versus STATE OF BIHAR …OPPOSITE PARTY ----------- 03. 27.10.2010 Heard counsel for the parties. Petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 17.06.2010, passed by learned 6th Addl. Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur in S.T.No.42/09(State vs. Ram Pravesh Mahto @ Purvi Mahto and others), whereby his application dated 11.11.2009 seeking his declaration of being juvenile in conflict with law has been considered and rejected. Few facts relevant for disposal of the case may be indicated. It appears from records that petitioner is facing three trials. The date of occurrence in first trial is 13.10.2006, whereas date of occurrence of two succeeding cases are 28.06.2008 and 08.08.2008. He made an application for declaring him juvenile in the first case being Piar P.S.Case No.86/06 (date of occurrence is 13.10.2006). Such claim was based on a certificate issued by the Principal of Ram Janki High School, Tepari. Evidence was allowed to be adduced wherein parents examined themselves as witnesses and proved the aforesaid certificate issued by the Principal of the school in question in which his date of birth has been recorded as 31.12.1990. On a consideration of the aforesaid facts appearing from records the petitioner was declared juvenile. The said order is placed at 2 Annexure-3 to the supplementary affidavit. In another case relating to the occurrence that had taken place on 28.06.2008, similar application was filed. The claim of juvenility was founded on the admit card, registration slip, mark sheets, all issued by the Bihar School Examination board, Patna. An enquiry was made in which the parents of the petitioner got themselves examined. On a consideration of materials on records, learned court by order dated 19.12.2009 (Annexure-2) accepted his date of birth as 31.12.1990 and thereby declared him juvenile. In the present case, a similar application was filed on behalf of petitioner for declaring him juvenile on the date of occurrence, i.e. 08.08.2008. Such claim was raised based on the aforesaid documents in which his date of birth stood recorded as 31.12.1990. The application was resisted by the State on the ground that it has been filed at a very belated stage. Learned trial court by order impugned rejected the said claim on the ground that by order dated 27.12.2007 (Annexure-3) he was assessed close to 16 and half years of age in respect of an occurrence that had taken place on 13.10.2006 and, as such, he would be more than 18 years of age considering the present date of occurrence (08.08.2008) and, accordingly, his claim was rejected. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on two earlier occasions, the documents filed in respect of his date of birth some of which pertains to his matriculation examination was/were accepted in the light of oral evidence supporting the aforesaid documents. It is contended that under the scheme of 3 the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) read with the Rule(s) framed thereunder, priority has to be given to the certificate issued by the Examination Board. It would appear from the previous order (Annexure-2 and 3) that the court having regard to the certificate brought on record, some of which were issued by the Bihar School Examination Board had already accepted the same wherein his date of birth was recorded as 31.12.1990 and, as such, learned court below committed serious mistake in conjecturing that in view of the order dated 22.12.2007 (Annexure-3) he would be more than 18 years of age on the date of occurrence(08.08.2008). This Court finds force in the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner. It is fairly settled law that claim of juvenility can be raised at any stage of the proceeding. If it is raised, the same has to be dealt with in terms of section 7A and 49 of the Act read with Rule(s) framed thereunder. Considering the aforesaid provisions of the Act and Rule 12 of the Rules, this Court is satisfied that the matter requires re-consideration by learned trial court. Accordingly order dated 17.06.2010, passed by learned 6th Addl. Sessions Judge; Muzaffarpur in S.T.No.42/09 is quashed and set aside. The matter goes back to the learned court below for enquiry and passing a fresh order in accordance with law on the application of the petitioner seeking juvenility. hr ( Kishore K. Mandal )