High Court acquits accused for being a juvenile
The court said that on <g data-gr-id="30">date</g> of the commission of the offence accused Siya Ram was a juvenile.
“There are two <g data-gr-id="33">evidences</g> in favour of the petitioner(Siya Ram); one is the medical examination and second, the school certificate. By considering either of the two, the petitioner was a juvenile on the date of the commission of the offence,” the court said.
“In view of the findings of this court on the age of the petitioner on the date of the offence and as per the provisions of the Juvenile Justice Act, the petitioner cannot remain incarcerated any further. Consequently, I hereby direct that the petitioner shall be set at liberty forthwith by the jail authorities, if not wanted in any other case,” the court ordered.
The accused had come in an appeal to the High Court against the order of a sessions court which had refused to declare him a juvenile.
Earlier, a Metropolitan Magistrate court had rejected his application for declaring him a juvenile. However, the trial court had declared the co-accused of the petitioner a juvenile. The High Court also pulled up the lower court for going on a fishing inquiry while considering the accuser’s application.
“We fail to see, after having summoned the admission register of the higher secondary school where the appellant had first studied and after having perused the same produced by the principal of school and having notice the fact that the appellant was born on 24.04.1996, what prompted the court not to accept that admission register produced by the principal of the school,” the High Court said.
“In the instant case, the age of the juvenile has not been established by the medical examination, <g data-gr-id="41">however</g> opined between 18-20 years. Thus, he is entitled to <g data-gr-id="40">lower</g> margin of one year in his age. To bring him down to one year, his age comes to 17 <g data-gr-id="37">year</g>, therefore, he is a juvenile as per the
certificate also,’’ the Court stated.