Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.45 seconds)
X- Minor vs State Of U.P. And Another on 7 October, 2025 cites

Sanjeev Kumar Gupta vs The State Of Uttar Pradesh on 25 July, 2019

After hearing the rival submissions, this court finds that although the high school certificate of the revisionist was filed before the Juvenile Justice Board but the underlying documents of school were found to be doubtful. As per judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sanjeev Kumar Gupta vs. State of U.P., AIR 2019 (SC) 4363, it was not reliable. The Board has considered that he was admitted in class-8th without any transfer certificate produced before the school of class- 7th. There is also contradiction in the statements of C.W.-1 and C.W.-2. While C.W.-1 stated that he had not gone to get the revisionist admitted in nursery school, his wife, C.W.-2, stated that he was admitted in the school by his father, C.W.-1. Photocopy of parivar register bore the date of birth of revisionist as 07.05.1989 which was about 4 years lower than the age of revisionist in the school. However, since the photocopy of parivar register was filed and it was not got proved by any witness from the panchayat as per Section 35 of the Evidence Act, it was not credible. Even otherwise in the transfer certificate register of Central Public School, Jafarpur, the age of other students of the same class was found to be more than 4-5 years from the date of birth of the revisionist. Therefore, the Board doubted the same. The attendance register of the school was also not produced before the Board which raised doubt about the claim of revisionist.
Supreme Court of India Cites 12 - Cited by 76 - D Y Chandrachud - Full Document

Rishi Pal Singh vs State Of U.P. Thru Secy. Deptt. Of Home ... on 31 August, 2022

Learned Senior Counsel for the revisionist has assailed the order passed by the Appellate Court on the ground that both the courts below have failed to consider the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of Rishi Pal Singh Solanki vs. State of U.P (2022) 8 SCC 602 and Vinod Katara vs. State of U.P., 2022 0 AIR (SC) 4771. It is submitted that despite the availability of the High School Certificate of the revisionist, the Juvenile Justice Board directed for conducting an ossification test, which was not required. In view of the requirements of Section 92(2) of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.
Allahabad High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 1 - S S Shamshery - Full Document
1