Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:124186 Court No. - 47 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 5870 of 2023 Revisionist :- Chinnu @ Deepak Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Dhirendra Singh Patel,Vivek Kumar Maheshwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Siddharth,J. On 07.07.2025 the following interim order was passed :- " Heard learned counsel for the revisionist; learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record. The present criminal revision has been filed to quash the order dated 12.10.2023 passed by Additional Session Judge/ Special Judge, POCSO Act, Muzaffar Nagar, in Special Case No.1605 of 2023 (State Vs. Chinnu @ Deepak), Case Crime No. 0363 of 2019, under Sections 376, 506 I.P.C. and 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Titavi, District Muzaffarnagar. After considering the rival submissions, this Court finds that during the pendency of Special Case No.1605 of 2023 (State Vs. Chinnu @ Deepak), an application was filed on behalf of juvenile on 11.8.2022 stating that in the statement of the victim recorded as PW-1 before the trial court, she has given the date of incident as 6.4.2019. The date of birth of the accused is 1.7.2001. Therefore, on the date of incident dated 6.4.2019 he was less than 18 years of age and he may be declared juvenile on the date of incident. The Special Court, after recording the statements of Principal of primary school and brother of the accused, arrived at the conclusion that the date of incident might have been wrongly mentioned inadvertently by the victim in her statement before the court as 6.4.2019, when in the FIR and general diary, the date of incident mentioned in between 6.7.2019 to 6.8.2019. The Special Court further held that the statement of the victim, PW-1, is incomplete and therefore, at this stage, application of the accused is not maintainable and is hereby rejected. Learned for the revisionist has again brought on record incomplete statement of PW-1, victim, recorded before the trial court by means of supplementary affidavit and has submitted that in her further cross- examination also, victim has claimed the date of incident as 6.4.2019. Thereafter her complete statement has not been brought on record. In the absence of complete statement of the victim, the above noted criminal revision cannot be decided. Learned counsel for the revisionist is directed to bring on record the complete statement of the victim recorded before the trial court, within two weeks. List this case on 28.7.2025. " Learned counsel for the revisionist has brought on record the complete statement of victim on record wherein she has stated that the incident in dispute took place on 06.04.2019 at 12:00 p.m. Therefore, the counsel for the revisionist submits that on the date the revisionist was clearly below 18 years of age. Despite service of notice on opposite party no. 2 as per office report dated 12.01.2025 no one has turned up to oppose this revision. Accordingly, it is held that on the date of incident dated 06.04.2019, the revisionist was below 18 years of age and is being declared juvenile. However, considering the fact that he was between the age of 16 - 18 years, therefore, the preliminary assessment of revisionist as per Section 15 shall be conducted by the trial court to ascertain whether he was capable of understanding the consequences of act done by him and was physically and mentally capable of the same before proceeding further with the trial. The Juvenile Justice Board will make assessment of the revisionist within period of three weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order and proceed accordingly. The revision is allowed. Order Date :- 28.7.2025 Rohit Digitally signed by :- ROHIT DAS High Court of Judicature at Allahabad