Gauhati High Court Sets Aside Trial Court Order Which Declined To Take School Certificate As Age Proof For Test Of Juvenility
The Gauhati High Court recently set aside an order passed by a Sessions Judge, vide which it refused to accept the school certificate as proof of age for the claim of juvenility by an accused, observing that there were no other documents to support that fact.The single judge bench of Justice Parthivjyoti Saikia noted:“……Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and juvenile/child in...
The Gauhati High Court recently set aside an order passed by a Sessions Judge, vide which it refused to accept the school certificate as proof of age for the claim of juvenility by an accused, observing that there were no other documents to support that fact.
The single judge bench of Justice Parthivjyoti Saikia noted:
“……Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and juvenile/child in conflict with law. Protection of Children) Act, 2015 also speaks about a school certificate showing date of birth for determination of age of a child. The learned Sessions Judge unnecessarily disbelieved the school certificate.”
The Court was hearing an application under Sections 397 and 401 of the CrPC challenging the judgment and order dated November 20, 2012 passed by the Sessions Judge, Karimganj in Sessions Case No. 60/2011.
The petitioner-accused, in order to establish his date of birth, produced the school certificate, wherein his date of birth was shown as February 15, 1994. In order to come to a decision, the Trial Court examined four witnesses.
The Trial Court accepted that the school certificate that showed the petitioner to be below 18 years of age on April 10, 2009. The court further held that except the said certificate, there were no other documents to support that fact.
In respect of the School Admission Register, the first court witness told the court that the petitioner was admitted into the school on the basis of verbal information regarding his date of birth. On the basis of the said statement, the Sessions Judge refused to believe the school certificate.
“No parents would tell a false date of birth at the time of admission of his/her child in a school on an assumption that within a fixed period of time, his/her child would commit an offence and he/she will therefore, get the benefit of being a juvenile/child in conflict with law,” the High Court observed.
The Court further noted that Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 provides for a school certificate showing date of birth for determination of age of a child.
“This Court is of the opinion that the learned Sessions Judge had erroneously oriented himself and arrived at an incorrect finding. Therefore, the impugned order is set aside. The petitioner Md. Matab Uddin shall be considered as a juvenile/child in conflict with law, below 18 years of age on 10th April, 2009. The learned Sessions Judge shall do accordingly,” the Court directed.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Gau) 22
Case Title: Md. Matab Uddin v. The State of Assam
Case No.: Crl.Rev.P./17/2013