RESERVED ON 27.8.2025 DELIVERED ON 16.9.2025 HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1135 of 2024 Court No. - 47 HON'BLE SIDDHARTH, J. 1.As per office report dated 13.5.2025 notice on opposite party no.2 has been served, but no one has put in appearance on behalf of opposite party no.2 to oppose this criminal revision. 2.Heard Sri Ravindra Sharma, learned counsel for the revisionist; learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record. 3.The criminal revision has been filed against the judgement and order dated 8.12.2023 passed by Special Judge (POCSO) Court No.1/Additional District & Sessions Judge, Meerut in Criminal Appeal No. 96 of 2023 as well as order dated 24.8.2022 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Meerut in case Crime No. 437 of 2021 under sections 302,465,420 I.P.C. P.S. Brahmpuri District Meerut. 4.The father of the revisionist, Mainudadin, filed an application before the J.J. Board, Meerut alongwith an affidavit pleading that his son (revisionist) has passed High School Examination in the year 2018 and his date of birth in the High School Certificate and marksheet is 17.12.2003.Therefore on the date of incident dated 21.9.2021, his age was 17 years, 9 months and 14 days and he was juvenile. Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Deepak Rana, Pallavi Rani, Ravindra Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. X- Juvenile .....Revisionist(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 5.The father of the revisionist aforesaid was examined as A.W.-1 before the Board and Naim Akhtar Azad, Assistant Teacher, of Faiz-A-Aam Inter college, Meerut was examined as A.W.2 before the Board.A.W.1, stated that revisionist is his youngest son.He has 11 children.When he admitted the revisionist in the school his correct date of birth was informed.He has passed class Xth examination from Faiz-A-Aam Inter Collage , Meerut in the 2018.During cross examination he stated that he got married in 1972. He never got birth certificate of revisionist issued. Revisionist was born at home.All his children were born at interval of quarter to 2-2 years of difference. Except date of birth of the revisionist he does not remembers the date of birth of any of his child. 6.A.W.2, stated that he was appointed in the college in the year 2010.The revisionist, son of A.W.1, was admitted in his college in the year 2017 and studied from class IXth to XI th.He did not took admission in class XIIth.He produced before the court the original S.R. Register, admission form of class IXth, transfer certificate issued by earlier school of revisionist,Madarsa Islama,Ziya Ulam,Panchali, Bujurag, Sardhana, Meerut, gazette of class Xth, attendance register of class IX.He proved that S.R. number of the revisionist was 46233 and his date of birth is recorded as 17.12.2003. 7.During cross examination, A.W. 2, admitted that at the time of admission in class IXth, no birth certificate of revisionist was produced.He was admitted in class IXth on the basis of transfer certificate issued by earlier Madarsa,wherein his date of birth was mentioned as 17.12.2003. 8.The manager of the Madarsa appeared before the court and stated that no child of the name of revisionist ever studied in his Madarsa nor the school leaving certificate produced by A.W.2 before the Board was ever issued by his Madarsa.It does not bears signature of any of the teacher of Madarsa. 9.Village Pradhan of village Panchali Bujurg was examined as CRLR No. 1135 of 2024 2 C.W.2 and he proved that no Madarsa in the name of Islam Jaya Ul-Ulas was ever existed in his village nor it is at present. 10.The Board sent request to the District Minority Welfare Officer, Meerut to verify the existence of aforesaid Madarsa and the report was submitted that aforesaid Madarsa was not recognized by the Board nor it ever came to notice of the District Minority Welfare Officer, Meerut. 11.The Board found from the medical report dated 26.6.2022 of the revisionist his age mentioned as 21 years.Therefore at the time incident dated 21.9.2021, he was found to be aged about 20 years which was clearly above 18 years at the time of incident,hence his claim was rejected by the J.J. Board, Meerut.The revisionist approach the Children's Court unsuccessfully and is now before this court by filing above noted revision challenging both the orders passed by the courts below. 12.After hearing the rival contentions, this court finds that Apex Court in the judgement of Sanjeev Kumar Gupta Vs. State of U.P. and another, reported inAIR, 2019,S.C.4364, has clearly held that High School certificate produced in support of claim of juvenility should be supported by underlying documents of school. In case there is conflict between the date of birth mentioned in school record and High School Certificate, the High School Certificate can not be relied upon .In the present case class XIIIth certificate , which was claimed to be issued by Madarsa of C.W.2 was not found to be issued at all by the Madarsa of C.W.2.Therefore date of birth recorded in class IXth of revisionist in the collage of A.W.2 was not based on any credible documentary evidence. Both the courts below rightly discarded the claim of juvenality of revisionist on the basis of High School Certificate. 13.This court does not finds any illegality in the same, hence this revision deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed. 14.Let the trial court record be returned to the trial court within one CRLR No. 1135 of 2024 3 week by the office. September 16, 2025 Atul kr. sri. CRLR No. 1135 of 2024 4 (Siddharth,J.) Digitally signed by :- ATUL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad