1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Rev. No.801 of 2024 …. Kunjal Yadav, aged about 48 years, son of Late Mulchand Yadav, resident of Village Dibha, P.O.- Chatra, P.S.- Chatra Sadar, District- Chatra ……Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Sintu Kumar @ Sintu Kumar Yadav, son of Rajesh Yadav, Resident of Village Dibha Muhalla, P.O. and P.S.-Chatra Sadar, District- Chatra ……Opp. Parties ----- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Santosh Kr. Soni, Advocate Mr.Vikram Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. P.D. Agrawal, Spl.P.P For the O.P. : Mr. Binod Kumar Dubey, Advocate …… CAV on 20.03.2025 Pronounce on 25.03.2025 This Criminal Revision Application No.801 of 2024 has been filed on behalf of the petitioner by challenging the judgment dated 10.06.2024 passed Sri S.M. Shahzad, learned Special Judge, Child Act Cases-Cum-Additional Sessions Judge-I, Chatra, in Criminal (Juvenile) Appeal No.24 of 2023, whereby and whereunder, the appeal has been dismissed and affirmed the order dated 24.05.2023 as well as order dated 27.05.2023, passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chatra and learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Chatra respectively, in connection with Chatra respectively, in connection with Chatra Sadar P.S. Case No.29 of 2023, registered for the offence under Section 302/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code, was dismissed and thereby affirmed the orders dated 24.05.2023 and 27.05.2023, passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chatra and learned Juvenile Justice Board, Chatra respectively as well as the orders 2 dated 24.05.2023 and 27.05.2023, passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chatra and learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Chatra respectively, in connection with Chatra Sadar P.S. Case No.29 of 2023, instituted for the offences under Sections 302/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code, whereby the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chatra has declared the accused as Juvenile and this case is now pending before the Court of learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Chatra. 2. The case of prosecution, in brief, is that on 14.02.2023 at 07.00 PM, while the informant was in his house then in the meantime Sintu Kumar, Bimal Yadav, Bablu Yadav, Dipak Yadav, Praveen Kumar, Ajit Kumar Yadav @ Lalu of his mohalla came and took his younger son Praveen Kumar Yadav with them for meeting of a program near Harlal Talab. It is further stated that when he asked them the name of members present in meeting, they told that Rajesh Yadav, Praveen Kumar, Kisun Yadav, Sanjay Yadav, Sanjay Kumar, Krishna Kumar Yadav, Bihari Yadav, Sonu Kumar, Bijay Yadav, Raju Yadav, Uttam Yadav, Rohit Soni, Subodh Yadav will be there and they took his son. Later on his brother informed him that he saw Prakash at Harlal Talab with 15- 20 person of mohalla. Then he made search of his son but had not found him at Harlal Talab and in course of search on 15.02.2023 in Turag forest near the river the dead body of his son was found lying. 3. Heard Mr. Santosh Kumar Soni, and Mr. Vikram Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P.D. Agrawal, learned Spl.P.P. as well as Mr. Binod Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the O.P. No.2. 4. It is submitted that the impugned judgment and order 3 passed by the learned Courts below are illegal, arbitrary and not sustainable in the eye of law. It is submitted that the learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board had committed grave error by declaring the O.P. No.2 as Juvenile and which has been wrongly affirmed by the learned Appellate Court. It is submitted that the learned Juvenile Justice Board has failed to taken into consideration that the Opposite Party No.2 has got several documents regarding his age, but learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chatra has considered the Admit Card of Secondary Examination 2023 issued by the Jharkhand Academic Council, Ranchi mentioning therein that the age of accused is 10.07.2007. It is submitted that the learned Trial Court has failed to taken into consideration that the Opposite Party No.2 has mentioned his age as 18 years in A.B.P No.15 of 2023 in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No.394 of 2022 which was filed before the learned Sessions Judge, Chatra. It is submitted that the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chatra only on the basis of Admit Card of Secondary Examination 2023 issued by the Jharkhand Academic Council, Ranchi has declared the accused-Opposite Party No.2 to be 15 years 07 months 04 days. It is submitted that the learned Trial Court has failed to taken into consideration that the petitioner was not served a copy of the petition filed by Opposite Party No.2 and he had no knowledge about the same and as such, petitioner could not be heard or participated in the assessment of the proceeding. It is submitted that the learned Trial Court has failed to consider that the said Admit Card of Secondary Examination 2023 was issued by the Jharkhand Academic Council, Ranchi but it was 4 not proved by any person of the Council and merely by the Probation Officer of Chatra was examined in this regard. It is submitted that the petitioner had adduced evidence in relation to the date of birth of the Opposite Party No.2 in the Criminal Juvenile Appeal No.24 of 2023 which shows that the date of birth of Opposite Party No.2 is 10.07.2004. It is submitted that the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chatra without having jurisdiction or authority to declare the Opposite Party No.2 as juvenile, has wrongly declared the O.P. No.2 juvenile by virtue of order dated 24.05.2023 and has also not followed the provision of Section 9 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015. It is submitted that the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chatra was supposed to conduct and enquiry in accordance with Section 9(2) of the Juvenile Justice Act and even take evidence to determine the age of the Opposite Party No.2. and hence the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Appellate Court and learned Chief Judicial Magistrate and learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Chatra may be set aside and this Criminal Revision Application may be allowed. 5. On the other hand, learned Spl.PP submitted that the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, and learned Appellate Court are fit and proper and no interreference is required. It is submitted that the learned Court below has taken into consideration the documents filed by O.P. No.2, which was Marksheet issued by Jharkhand Academic Council, Ranchi in the name of O.P. NO.2 and which is a public document, and hence there is no error in the impugned judgment and order mentioned above, hence this Criminal Revision 5 Application may be dismissed. 6. Learned counsel for the O.P. No.2, after adopting the submission of learned Spl.PP has further submitted that the O.P. No.2 is a juvenile and the learned Court below has taken into consideration the Marksheet of Jharkhand Academic Council, Ranchi issued by the School Authorities and which is a public document. It is submitted that the learned Chief Judicial Magistarte, Chatra has committed no error by declaring the O.P. No.2 as a juvenile under Section 9 of Juvenile Justice Act, 2015. 7. It is submitted that the law does not require to given any opportunity of hearing to the Informant. It is submitted that the matter is between the State and the O.P. No.2 for declaring the O.P. No.2 as juvenile. It is well settled law that before declaring juvenile the authority must made enquiry under Section 9(2) of the J.J. Act which has been done and his date of birth was found genuine. 8. It is submitted that the Certificate issued by Jharkhand Academic Council was also verified by the Probation Officer and after due verification of the documents the Opposite Party no.2 was declared juvenile and in the school the parents of the O.P. no.2 had mentioned the date of birth according to Horoscope and hence the order declaring the O.P. No.2 as juvenile is just and proper and the Juvenile Justice Board has also followed the mandate of law. 9. It is submitted that the plea of juvenile can be taken before any Court at any stage, and in support of his contention. Learned counsel for the O.P. No.2 has placed reliance upon the judgment passed in Criminal Appeal (DB) No.1395 of 2016 (Vinod Kumar Singha Vs. State of Jharkhand) in which the age of 6 the appellant was mentioned 32 years but subsequently he had taken plea of juvenile then this High Court sent the same before Juvenile Court for enquiry and after enquiry he was declared juvenile. 10. It is submitted that the O.P. No.2 has only one certificate which is issued by Jharkhand Academic Council. Informant might have manufactured forged documents which cannot stand in the eye of law. It is submitted that this Hon’ble Court may direct any independent agency for enquiry and if Certificate of the O.P. No.2 issued by Jharkhand Academic Council as well as Certificate submitted by Opposite party No.2 is found forged then he is ready to face consequences and thus, this Criminal Revision is fit to be dismissed with cost. 11. It appears from the records that the O.P. No.2 has been declared Juvenile vide order dated 24.05.2023 by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chatra, on the basis of document filed by the O.P. No.2 and the said document was issued by the Jharkhand Academic Council, Ranchi on 19.04.2024 and in which his date of birth mentioned as 10.07.2007 and the petitioner has also filed the Provisional Certificate issued by the Jharkhand Academic Council showing his date of birth is 10.07.2007. 12. It further reveals that the informant and the petitioner had preferred Criminal Appeal bearing letter no. 51/DCPU/LPO/Chatra before the learned Appellant Court which had enclosed certain documents in support of this case. However, learned Appellant Court had dismissed the appeal without discussing the documents filed by the informant and the petitioner before the learned Appellate Court below and the learned Trial Court had not discussed about the order dated 24.05.2023 passed by the learned 7 Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chatra and also bearing letter no. 651/DCPU/LPO/Chatra received in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chatra. 13. Thus, the order dated 24.05.2023 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chatra is not proper. So far as the order dated 24.05.2023 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate is concerned. It reveals that the guardian of O.P. No.2 produced the admit card of Jharkhand Academic Council, Ranchi showing the date of birth of O.P. No.2 Sintu Kumar @ Sintu Kumar Yadav is 10.07.2007. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate relied upon the letter dated 19.05.2023 by which received from Probation Officer, Chatra who is said to have verified the genuineness of the certificate issued by the Jharkhand Academic Council, Ranchi. 14. Section 9 of the juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, which are as follow:- “9. Procedure to be followed by a Magistrate who has not been empowered under this Act.- (1) When a Magistrate, not empowered to exercise the powers of the Board under this Act is of the opinion that the person alleged to have committed the offence and brought before him is a child, he shall, without any delay, record such opinion and forward the child immediately along with the record of such proceedings to the Board having jurisdiction. (2) In case a person alleged to have committed an offence claims before a Court other than a Board, that the person is a child or was a child on the date of commission of the offence, or if the Court itself is of the opinion that the person was a child on the date of commission of the offence, the said Court shall make an inquiry, take such evidence as may be necessary (but not an affidavit) to determine the age of such person, and shall record a finding on the matter, stating the age of the person as nearly as may be: Provided that such a claim may be raised before any 8 Court and it shall be recognized at any stage, even after final disposal of the case, and such a claim shall be determined in accordance with the provisions contained in this Act and the rules made thereunder even if the person has ceased to be a child on or before the date of commencement of this Act. (3) If the Court finds that a person has committed an offence and was a child on the date of commission of such offence, it shall forward the child to the Board for passing appropriate orders and the sentence, if any, passed the Court shall be deemed to have no effect. (4) In a case a person under this section is required to be kept in protective custody, while the person’s claim of being a child is being inquired into, such person may be placed, in the intervening period in a place of safety.” 15. It appears that the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate without taking evidence of any witness has declared the juvenile on the basis of Admit Card of the O.P. No.2 without examining any witness and as only relied upon the letter received form Probation Officer. Thus, no proper procedure was followed under Section 9 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. 16. Accordingly, the order dated 24.05.2023 passed in MCA No.831 of 2023 by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chatra and the order dated 27.05.2023 passed by the learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board and the order dated 10.06.2024 passed in Criminal (Juvenile) Appeal No.24 of 2023 passed by S.M. Shahzad, Special Judge, Child Act Cases-Cum-Additional Sessions Judge-I, Chatra are set aside and the matter is remitted back to the learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board for deciding the matter afresh. 17. Learned Principal Magistrate, and Members of Juvenile Justice Board is directed to make a fresh enquiry with regard to the age of the O.P. No.2 Sintu Kumar @ Sintu Kumar Yadav and shall allow the informant to participate in the enquiry with regard to the 9 determinations of age of the O.P. No.2 in accordance with law and shall also provide reasonable opportunity to the informant and to file his defence. 18. With aforesaid observation and direction this Criminal Revision No.801 of 2024 is allowed and stands disposed of. 19. Let a copy of this order be sent to the learned Court below. (Sanjay Prasad, J.) Nishant/-