Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

It is argued that the prosecution has registered a case against the present applicant under the POSCO Act alleging that the prosecutrix was a minor at the time of commission of offence. The date of birth of the applicant as per Matriculation Certificate is shown to be 28.06.2001. Earlier his date of birth which was recorded as 28.06.2000 in the school records, but subsequently the same was corrected in the Matriculation Certificate which is reflected from the order-sheet dated 09.05.2022 passed in Special Case No.78/2019, whereby, the factum of juvenility of the applicant was directed to be considered.

Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ashwani Kumar Saxena vs. State of M.P. and others, reported in (2012) 9 SCC 750 has held as under:

"32. “Age determination inquiry†contemplated under section 7A of the Act r/w Rule 12 of the 2007 Rules enables the court to seek evidence and in that process, the court can obtain the matriculation or equivalent certificates, if available. Only in the absence of any matriculation or equivalent certificates, the court need obtain the date of birth certificate from the school first attended other than a play school. Only in the absence of matriculation or equivalent certificate or the date of birth certificate from the school first attended, the court need obtain the birth certificate given by a corporation or a municipal authority or a panchayat (not an affidavit but certificates or documents). The question of obtaining medical opinion from a duly constituted Medical Board arises only if the above mentioned documents are unavailable. In case exact assessment of the age cannot be done, then the court, for reasons to be recorded, may, if considered necessary, give the benefit to the child or juvenile by considering his or her age on lower side within the margin of one year.

34. Age determination inquiry contemplated under the JJ Act and Rules has nothing to do with an enquiry under other legislations, like entry in service, retirement, promotion etc. There may be situations where the entry made in the matriculation or equivalent certificates, date of birth certificate from the school first attended and even the birth certificate given by a Corporation or a Municipal Authority or a Panchayat may not be correct. But Court, J.J. Board or a Committee functioning under the J.J. Act is not expected to conduct such a roving enquiry and to go behind those certificates to examine the correctness of those documents, kept during the normal course of business. Only in cases where those documents or certificates are found to be fabricated or manipulated, the Court, the J.J. Board or the Committee need to go for medical report for age determination. "

From a bare perusal of the aforesaid judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court, it is apparently clear that for determining the age of an accused/juvenile in case there is a dispute, the Matriculation Certificate has to be given prime importance over and above all other documents. In the present case, admittedly, the date of birth of the applicant which is recorded in the Matriculation Certificate is 28.06.2001 and he is admittedly ten days' small than the Date: 2022.07.05 11:04:39 IST prosecutrix. The incident took place on 15.05.2019.