HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1965 of 2025 Court No. - 47 HON'BLE SIDDHARTH, J. 1. As per office report dated 03.7.2025 notice on opposite party nos.2 & 4 has been served, but no one has put in appearance on behalf of opposite party nos.2 & 4 to oppose this criminal revision. 2. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist; learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record. 3. The present criminal revision has been filed to set and aside the judgement and order dated 17.03.2025, passed by Juvenile Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Court No. 3, Ghaziabad, in Criminal Appeal No- 30 of 2025 & order dated 13.09.2024 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Ghaziabad, arising out of crime no- 455 of 2023 under section 376(3) I.P.C. & 3/4 POCSO Act, Police station- Tronica City, District- Ghaziabad. 4. By the order dated 13.9.2024 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, after the declaration of the revisionist as juvenile, called for the report of the psychologist. The psychologist proved the same before the court stating that he conducted the psychological examination of the revisionist and found him to be psychologically normal keeping in view his behaviour, examination of senses, speech and level of thinking. No sign of mental ailment was found in the revisionist. The Juvenile Justice Board also examined him and found his mental and physical condition to be normal and the revisionist being capable of understanding the consequences of his act. 5. On the basis of both the aforesaid considerations, revisionist was declared Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Ankit Srivastava, Surya Bhan Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. X Juvenile .....Revisionist(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) to be child in conflict with law and required to be tried as adult as per Section 18(3) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act. 6. Aggrieved by the order dated 13.9.2024 of Juvenile Justice Board, a criminal appeal No.30 of 2025 was preferred before the Children's Court by the revisionist, which has confirmed the same by its order dated 17.3.2025. Hence this revision. 7. Leaned counsel for the revisionist has submitted that the revisionist was about 16 years of age on the date of incident dated 03.8.2023, but his age was wrongly determined by the Juvenile Justice Board from the evidence produced before the Juvenile Justice Board is the form of school admission register and oral evidence, it was proved that he was below 16 years of age, but the Juvenile Justice Board committed illegality. 8. Learned AGA has opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the revisionist and has submitted that orders passed by the courts below are in accordance with law. 9. After hearing rival contentions, this Court finds that revisionist was declared juvenile by the Juvenile Justice Board by the order dated 15.1.2024. Thereafter by the order dated 13.9.2024, he was declared child in conflict with law and found capable of committing heinous offence as per preliminary assessment and was directed to be tried as adult as per Section 18(3) of the Act by the Juvenile Justice Boad. The revisionist never challenged the order dated 15.1.2024 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board declaring the revisionist as child in conflict with law, aged above 16 years of age. No arguments have been raised regarding the preliminary assessment of the revisionist made by both the courts below as per Section 15 of the At nor any illegality has been pointed out in the orders passed by the courts below. No ground is made out for setting aside the orders passed by the courts below and they are, hereby, confirmed. 10. The above noted criminal revision is dismissed. 11. Office is directed to return the trial court, within a week. September 9, 2025 Ruchi Agrahari CRLR No. 1965 of 2025 2 (Siddharth,J.) Digitally signed by :- RUCHI AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad