Delhi District Court
Ca No. 402/17 "Red Rose Model School vs State" on 2 February, 2018
CA No. 402/17 "Red Rose Model School Vs State"
IN THE COURT OF SH. GAUTAM MANAN, ASJ(SFTC)
SOUTH WEST, DWARKA ,NEW DELHI
Criminal Appeal No. 402/17
In the matter of:
Red Rose Model School
Through its Manager
Sh. Parmanand Aggarwal.
WE Block, Mohan Garden,
Rama Park Road, Uttam Nagar,
New Delhi. ... Appellant
Versus
State
Govt. of NCT Delhi ... Respondent
Date of institution of Appeal : 11.12.2017
Date on which judgment reserved : 02.02.2018
Date on which judgment pronounced : 02.02.2018
ORDER
1. Present appeal is directed under Section 101 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 against order dated 09.11.2017 passed by Ld. Principal Magistrate, JJB-II in case FIR No. 513/2017, P.S. Vikas Puri, New Delhi thereby directing registration of FIR. Criminal Appeal Page 1 of 5 CA No. 402/17 "Red Rose Model School Vs State"
2. As per facts of the case, Ld JJB-II took the cognizance of the fact that parents of CCL in his first attended school mentioned his date of birth as 04.11.1998 but at the time of registration in 9th standard in the appellant school, date of birth of CCL was changed to 04.11.1999. Ld JJB-II observed that prime facie parents of CCL committed offences of false declaration and forging the records and appellant also committed the same offences and hence recommended the registration of FIR under appropriate sections of IPC.
3. Appellant assailed the above order on the ground that no forgery was committed by appellant rather the information in respect of CCL was uploaded on the website of CBSE only on the basis of declaration/form submitted by parents of CCL and nowhere in its record the appellant school changed the date of birth of CCL. It is submitted by appellant that there was only an inadvertent mistake in uploading the information of CCL and thus Ld JJB-II wrongly imputed allegations of forgery on appellant in the date of birth record of CCL.
Criminal Appeal Page 2 of 5 CA No. 402/17 "Red Rose Model School Vs State"
4. Along with appeal, appellant filed an application seeking stay of registration of FIR and has prayed that impugned order which caused grave injustice to the appellant be set aside. During pendency of the appeal, it came on record that pursuant to the orders passed by Ld JJB-II, FIR No. 612/2017 for the offence punishable u/s 420/468/471/34 IPC has already been registered and investigations are taken.
5. Ld counsel for appellant fairly concedes that since FIR is registered as such his application seeking stay of registration of FIR stands infructuous and as such appeal is restricted to assail observation made by Ld JJB-II that appellant has committed the offence of false declaration and forgery.
6. It is submitted on behalf of appellant that Ld Trial Court wrongly observed that appellant school committed the offences as committed by parents of accused without considering that appellant had no motive to do so. It is submitted that even in School Record of appellant, date of birth of appellant still exists to be 04.11.1998 and mentioning of date of birth as 04.11.1999 on the website of CBSE was only due to the fact that parents of CCL furnished wrong information in the form supplied to them. Criminal Appeal Page 3 of 5 CA No. 402/17 "Red Rose Model School Vs State"
7. Per contra, Ld. APP submits that Ld Trial Court after considering the material before it has rightly concluded that not only parents of CCL but appellant also is guilty of committing forgery of record in date of birth of CCL and as such the impugned order does not call for any interference.
8. I have heard the rival contentions and have gone through the record.
9. During proceedings of appeal, it has come on record that FIR No. 612/17 for offence punishable u/s 420/468/471/34 IPC stands registered pursuant to the passing of impugned order. Status report in respect of the investigations carried out has been filed on record. It is mentioned in status report that during investigations a notice was given to appellant school to provide documents in respect of CCL and appellant has already provided the documents and same had been seized through seizure memo.
10. Admission record of CCL which has been filed on record by the appellant indicates that in the application form of appellant as well as in the admission register the date of birth of appellant is correctly mentioned as 04.11.1998. Criminal Appeal Page 4 of 5 CA No. 402/17 "Red Rose Model School Vs State"
11. In CBSE form date of birth of CCL is mentioned as 04.11.1999. Form, on basis of which information was sent to CBSE was filled by the parents of CCL and not the School. Question that whether appellant committed any forgery or not is still to be investigated and same is under scrutiny of the investigating agency. At this stage, it cannot be stated as to whether appellant school is guilty of committing any forgery in the school record in respect of the date of birth of CCL or not. With aforesaid observations present appeal stands dismissed as FIR already stands registered.
Trial Court Record be sent back along with copy of this order. Appeal file be consigned to record room.
Announced in the open court on 2nd day of February, 2018.
Digitally signed (GAUTAM MANAN)
by GAUTAM
GAUTAM MANAN ASJ (SFTC) /SOUTH WEST
MANAN Date:
2018.02.03
DWARKA COURTS:DELHI
14:18:45 +0530
Criminal Appeal Page 5 of 5