IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.956 of 2010 ***** Vinay Kumar @ Vinay Rai, Son of Dandu Roy, Resident of Village Rampur Syamchand, P.S. Raghopur, District-Vaishali. …..Petitioner. Versus The State of Bihar …..Opposite Party. For the Petitioner : Mr. Amir Alam, Advocate. For the State : APP. ----------- 02/ 24.08.2011 The accused-petitioner has preferred this revision application under Section 53 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 against the order dated 15.03.2010 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-II, Vaishali at Hajipur in Sessions Trial No. 195/2006/571/2006 arising out of Raghopur P.S. Case No. 01 of 2006 under Sections 302, 307, 436 and other minor Sections of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act by which the petition dated 22.09.2008 filed on behalf of the petitioner under Section 7A of the Juvenile Justice Act has been rejected. The main contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the learned Sessions Judge has rejected the petition of the petitioner on the ground that School Leaving Certificate and the date purported to be mentioned in the School Admission Register appears to be not genuine. He has further contended that the rules 2 for the determination of the age of a juvenile the Bihar Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2003 have been framed and according to the Rule 22 the Board or the Court holding the enquiry for the determination of age has been given guidelines. According to the Rule 22 (5) of the aforesaid rule, in absence of the certificate granted by the corporation or the municipality or the date of birth certificate from the School, first attended or matriculation certificate and the opinion of the medical board has to be taken for consideration but this rule has not been followed by the learned court below. Learned Counsel for the State has submitted that the petitioner has produced certificates which have been found to be not reliable and as such the claim of the petitioner to be a juvenile has been rejected. After hearing and perusal of the impugned order it appears that the petitioner had filed a petition dated 22.09.2008 under Section 7A of the Juvenile Justice Act claiming to be a juvenile and his claim of juvenility is based on the certificates granted by Madhya Vidyalaya, Singhara, Gaya it appears that the School Leaving Certificate produced by the petitioner has been 3 found to be not genuine. It does not appear from the impugned order that in absence of the certificate the report of the medical board has been called for. According to the rule, if the certificate is not available or not genuine then in that case the report of the medical board constituted for the determination of the age of the person claiming to be a juvenile should be called for. It has not been done in this case. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in my opinion, the impugned order is not fit to be sustained. It is set aside. The matter is remanded to the learned court below for holding further enquiry in view of the provisions contained in Rule 22(5) of the Bihar Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2003. In the result, this petition is allowed. kksinha/- (Amaresh Kumar Lal, J.)