Summary
A juvenility plea raised at the earliest opportunity could not be rejected merely because an earlier horoscope-based application failed, when a birth certificate was later produced and no proper age inquiry occurred. The Court ordered a fresh statutory inquiry with participation of both sides, police assistance and ossification only as a last resort if documents proved inconclusive. The inquiry report was due within twelve weeks; the criminal appeals remained pending for further hearing.
Issues
- Whether earlier rejection excused failure to inquire into the renewed juvenility claim supported by a birth certificate.
- What procedure and time limit should govern the age inquiry.
Provisions considered
- Section 7-A, Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000The accused had invoked juvenility before committal and renewed it at trial; earlier rejection did not justify dismissing the later plea without proper inquiry. (¶¶ 4, 5, 12, 14, 15)
- Section 9(2), proviso, and statutory age-inquiry procedure, Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015Juvenility may be raised at any stage, even after final disposal. A fresh inquiry under the 2015 Act and rules was directed on this record. (¶¶ 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21)
Held
- Delay alone cannot defeat a juvenility claim, which may be raised even after final disposal. A post-conviction claimant must produce material sufficient prima facie to warrant inquiry; that threshold differs from a final determination of age and must be approached consistently with the protective legislation. (¶¶ 10, 11, 12, 13)
- The accused had actually raised juvenility early. His first application relied on a horoscope; the later trial application included a birth certificate issued in 1995. Rejecting it because that certificate had not accompanied the earlier application, without a proper statutory inquiry, was unsustainable. The Court did not itself declare him juvenile. (¶¶ 14, 15, 16)
- The first Additional Sessions Judge, Darbhanga must thoroughly inquire into age/date of birth under the 2015 Act and rules, assisted by the concerned Station House Officer. Both the accused and prosecution must have a proper opportunity to participate. Ossification may be used only as a last resort if the documentary material does not yield a logical conclusion. (¶¶ 16, 17, 18)
- The inquiry must conclude within twelve weeks, with the report sent to the Supreme Court and copies supplied to both sides. The lead matter was directed to be listed in the third week of August 2024 with the connected appeal; conviction merits and final relief remained undecided. (¶¶ 19, 20, 21, 22, 23)
Result
Interim age-inquiry directions issued; report required within twelve weeks. Appeals retained for further hearing, with no final juvenility or conviction determination.