IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.1474 of 2010 1. SANTOSH RAI(THROUGH THE NATURAL GUARDIANSHIP OF HIS FATHER NAMELY SITA RAM RAI) SON OF LATE SUKHDEO RAI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE GAUBIPUR, P.S. BENIPATTI,MADHUBANI 2. ASHOK SHAFI(UNDER THE NATURAL GUARDIANSHIP OF HIS FATHER NAMELY MANORATH SAFI) SON OF LATE RAMPREET SHAFI RESIDENT OF VILLAGE AKAUR P.S. BENIPATTI, MADHUBANI. …PETITIONERS Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR 2. NILAMBER CHAOUDHARY, SON OF LATE HARIDEO CHAOUDHARY, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE GAIVIPUR,P.S. BENIPATTI, MADHUBANI …OPPOSITE PARTIES For the petitioners :Mr.Ajay Kr. Thakur & :Mr. Ravi Ranjan For the informant :Mr. Manish Kumar For the State :Mr. Ajit Kumar, APP ----------- 03. 03.01.2011 Heard both sides. Petitioners are facing accusations punishable under section 302 IPC. They raised a plea of being juvenile before the learned trial court in S.T.No. 408/2010 and claimed to be treated as such. Learned trial court rejected the said application filed on behalf of the petitioner on the ground that at a belated stage such application/issue was being raised. This is apparent from the order dated 23.09.2010. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that going by the spirit of the provisions contained in Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2000 and Rules,2003 (for short the ‘Act’) and the ‘Rules’ made thereunder, such plea can be raised at any stage of the 2 proceeding and once it is raised the court is required to make an enquiry and decide the claim as per the procedures laid down thereunder. It is thus the submission that the order refusing to initiate enquiry in terms of section 7A of the Act is bad in law and requires interference. Learned counsel for the informant(o.p.no.2) submits that there are several documents which will indicate that petitioners are not juvenile. He, however, admits that once an issue is raised with regard to juvenility, the authority has to consider and dispose of the same in accordance with the provisions contained in the Act and the Rules framed thereunder. Having considered the submissions made on behalf of the parties, this Court is satisfied that order impugned dated 23.09.2010 is fit to be interfered with and is accordingly set aside. Learned trial court shall initiate an enquiry in terms of the provisions of the Act either himself or send the matter to the Juvenile Justice Board for making an inquiry with regard to the claim of the petitioners that they are juvenile on the date of occurrence. Informant(o.p.no.2) shall be at liberty to place all the relevant documents before the court making enquiry to show that the claim is unjustified and not sustainable in law. It will be equally open to the petitioners to produce all cogent materials to show that they were juvenile on the date of occurrence. Since the trial is already underway, this Court expects that the enquiry contemplated under the Act shall be 3 concluded by the court concerned expeditiously. The application is accordingly disposed of. hr ( Kishore K. Mandal )