IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Revision No.1600 of 2009 Suman Kumar Pandey son of late Narshingdutt Pandey R/o village Nayagaon, P.s. Nayagaon, Dist. Chapra Saran ……Petitioner. Versus 1. State Of Bihar 2. Jitendra Kumar Pandit, son of Prabhu Pandit, R/o village Hasilpur, P.S. Nayagaon, Dist. Saran. 3. Nishant Kumar son of Tarkeshwar Ram, /o village Nayagaon, P.S. Nayagaon, Distt. Saran ……opposite parties. ----------- For the petitioner : Dr.Amrendra Kumar, Advocate. For the State : Dr. Ravindra Kumar, A.P.P. ----------- 3 07.12.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The informant petitioner has preferred this revision application against the order dated 17.8.2009 passed by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge in Cri. Appeal (Juvenile) No. 118 of 2008 by which the order dated 4.6.2008 passed by the learned Juvenile Justice Board in Juvenile Trial No. 307 of 2008 has been set aside and the O.P. nos. 2 and 3 have been declared juvenile. It appears from the judgment of the appellate court that admittedly the date of occurrence is 8.8.2007 and the date of birth as mentioned in the school leaving certificate and also in the Admit Card and also in the mark sheet it appears that the date of birth of Jitendra Kumar Pandit is 22.12.1991 and date of birth of accused Nishant Kumar is 2.1.1993 which has been disbelieved by the learned Juvenile Justice Board and taken the report of the Medical Board. It appears in Rule 12 (3) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007 it has been 2 mentioned that first of all the court or the Board , as the case may be, will consider the matriculation or equivalent certificates , if available; and in the absence whereof; (ii) the date of birth certificate from the school (other than a play school ) first attended ; and in the absence whereof; (iii) the birth certificate given by a corporation or a municipal authority or a Panchayat; and only in the absence of those three certificates the Medical Board will have to be constituted and a report where of will be called for. In this case learned appellate court has found and considered the date of birth mentioned in matriculation certificate as well as mentioned in the mark sheet and the admit card photo copy of the which have been accepted. Considering the facts and circumstances stated above, I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. This petition is dismissed. M.Rahman (Amaresh Kumar Lal, J)