Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Jeetu @ Jeetu Singh @ Jeetendra S/O Najjo vs State Of Rajasthan on 22 September, 2022
Author: Birendra Kumar
Bench: Birendra Kumar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 8091/2022
Jeetu @ Jeetu Singh @ Jeetendra S/o Najjo, R/o Village
Tyoahari, Police Thana Weir, District Bharatpur (Rajasthan).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Public Prosecutor.
2. Brijesh S/o Hari Singh, R/o Jasvant Nagar, Atalbandh, District Bharatpur, Rajasthan.
----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Munesh Bhardwaj For Respondent(s) : Mr. Laxman Meena, Pp HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR Order 22/09/2022 Heard the parties.
The petitioner is an accused in FIR No.0048/2022 dated 09.02.2022 registered with AtalBand Police Station, District- Bharatpur for offence under Section 363 IPC.
After investigation, the Police submitted charge-sheet for offences under Sections 363 and 376 IPC as well as Sections 3 and 4 of the POCSO Act and under different provisions of Section 3 of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The victim was a minor and, for that, the court below relied upon the School Admission Register, whereunder, date of birth of the victim is recorded as 02.07.2007.
The petitioner-accused made prayer before the court below for determination of the age of the victim by Medical Board for the reason that in the application form for admission, there was (Downloaded on 24/09/2022 at 12:47:48 AM) (2 of 2) [CRLMP-8091/2022] cutting in the year of birth and the year 2005 was made as the year 2007. There is no correction in the School Admission Register, which contains the year of birth as 2007.
Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 provides for how the age could be determined of a juvenile in conflict with law. The first priority is to be given to the date of birth certificate from the School or matriculation or equivalent certificate from the concerned examination Board, if available and in absence thereof, the birth certificate given by a Corporation or Municipal Authority or a Panchayat and only in absence of the two above, the age shall be determined by ossification test or any other latest medical age determination test conducted on the order of the Committee or the Board.
It has been settled by judicial pronouncements that the same procedure would be adopted for determination of age of a victim of crime.
By the impugned order dated 04.08.2022, learned Special Judge refused the prayer of the petitioner for getting age of the victim determined by the Medical opinion.
The petitioner would have opportunity to cross-examine the witness, who comes before the Court to support the date of birth of the victim. The Court below has not gone against the mandates of the law.
Therefore, this petition stands dismissed as devoid of any merit.
Pending application, if any, also stands dismissed.
(BIRENDRA KUMAR),J Sunita/10 (Downloaded on 24/09/2022 at 12:47:48 AM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)