Allahabad High Court
Ankit @ Tillu vs State Of U.P. & Another on 7 July, 2010
Author: Arvind Kumar Tripathi
Bench: Arvind Kumar Tripathi
Court No. - 52 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 4827 of 2009 Petitioner :- Ankit @ Tillu Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Another Petitioner Counsel :- Akhilesh Srivastava Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate,A.R.Gupta Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Tripathi,J.
The present criminal revision has been filed challenging the order dated 17.11.2009 passed by IIIrd learned Additional Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court No.2, Etah rejecting the application for declaring the revisionist juvenile as well as in Session Trial No. 921 of 2006 under Section 302 IPC, State versus Ankit alias Tillu.
Learned counsel for the applicant contended that according to the school certificate of Ulfatrai Inter College, the date of birth of the applicant is 3rd July, 1989 and date of accident is 11th June, 2006 hence, he was minor being less than 17 years on the date of accident. However, the court below committed an error in rejecting the application to declare the applicant juvenile. He further contended that the applicant was earlier in Primary School Basundhara and Head Mistress Sandhya Jauhari was examined. According to her, date of birth of the applicant was shown in the register as 3rd July,1989 who left the college on 6th June,1992 after passing class 5th. Even according to the medical report dated 3rd August, 2009, he was 19 years of age. Even considering the margine he was minor at the time of accident. Both learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the complainant opposing the aforesaid revision submitted that the trial court has rightly rejected the aforesaid application. It was submitted that in fact earlier the applicant was student of Vijay Junior High School, Rajgarh however, at serial no. 6742 of the registere there was no signature of any authorised person of the college. Even the Head Mistress of Primary School Basundhara, Sandhya Jauhari, has clearly stated that she did not know on which basis date of birth of the applicant was mentioned in the register. Apart from that at the time of moving bail application it was stated that the applicant was student of High school however, no such certificate was filed. The conduct of the applicant is doubtful. Neither he has placed any document of Adarsh Vidya Mandir nor of Vijay Junior High School, Rajgarh and whatever certificate was mentioned that could not be proved beyond doubt because in the register, there was no signature in the column at serial No. 6742. Considering the margine, according to the statement of doctor, the applicant was not juvenile. Considering the submissions of the parties, it is clear that the application was moved after a considerable delay, though it is a right of the applicant to move an application at any stage but in the present case the conduct of the applicant was doubtful because no certificate or any evidence of Adarsh Vidya Mandir or Vijay Junior High School, Rajgarh was placed by the applicant, and the certificate which was placed, there was no signature on the register after entry in that column. Considering the upward age, according to doctor, the applicant will not be entitled to get benefit on the basis of medical report. In the present case, it appears that purposely the applicant has not placed the correct certificate of that school where he studied. Hence no interference is required in the impugned order dated 17.11.2009 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court No.2, Etah. Accordingly the present revision is hereby rejected and the interim order dated 1.12.2009 is hereby discharged. The trial court is free to proceed with the trial. It is expected that the trial will be concluded expeditiously without any unreasonable delay. Office to communicate this order to the court concerned.
Order Date :- 7.7.2010 prabhat