Page 1

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL  NO.511 OF 2014

(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl) No. 9028 OF 2011)

Sikander Mahto .        ...    APPELLANT (S)

VERSUS

Tunna @ Tunnu Mian @ Tunna Mian @    ...  RESPONDENT(S)  @ Mobin Ansari & Anr.

J U D G M E N T

RANJAN GOGOI, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. The  first  respondent  Tunna  @ Tunnu  Mian  @ Tunna  

Mian  @   Mobin  Ansari  was  committed  to  the  Court  of  

Sessions to  face  trial  for  offences under  Sections 302/201  

and 376 of the Indian Penal Code.  The first respondent filed  

an  application  claiming  to  be  a  juvenile  and  in  support  

thereof  he  had  enclosed  a  certificate  issued  by  the  

1

Page 2

Government  Primary  Urdu  School,  Shekhawa,  Basantpur,  

Block Mainatand wherein his date of birth was mentioned as  

15.01.1991.  The date of occurrence of the offences alleged  

in the present case is 16.11.2006.

3. The  learned  Trial  Court,  for  reasons  not  very  clearly  

stated, recorded the finding that the certificate produced by  

the first respondent was a forged one.  Accordingly, the first  

respondent was sent for medical  examination by a Board.  

Though the report of the Board was to the effect that the first  

respondent was 17 years of age, the learned Trial Court took  

the view that the said opinion would admit the possibility of a  

variation of 2 years.  Consequently, the learned Trial Court by  

order  dated  24.12.2007  refused  to  accept  the  claim  of  

juvenility raised on behalf of the first respondent.

4. Aggrieved, the first respondent moved the Patna High  

Court.  By order dated 14.11.2008 the High Court interfered  

with  the  order  of  the  learned Trial  Court  and allowed the  

application of the first respondent herein declaring him to be  

a juvenile and to be of sixteen and a half years of age on the  

date of alleged occurrence.  Challenging the aforesaid finding  

2

Page 3

of the High Court, the complainant, who is the father of the  

victim of the crime, has approached this Court.   

5. A reply has been filed on behalf of the first respondent  

in the present appeal wherein reliance has, once again, been  

placed on the school certificate issued by the Government  

Urdu  School  Shekhwa,  Basantpur,  Distt.  East  Champaran  

reference  to  which  has  been  made  earlier.   The  first  

respondent in his reply has also contended that the report of  

the  medical  examination  clearly  indicates  that  he  was  a  

minor on the relevant date and that there is no reason as to  

why the said medical report should not be accepted.   

6. The appellant has been allowed by this Court leave to  

bring on record certain documents which, according to the  

appellant, have a significant bearing to the issues arising in  

the present case.

7. The first document that has been brought on the record  

of the present appeal is a letter/certificate dated 3.4.2013  

issued by  the  Principal,  Government  Primary  Urdu School,  

Shekhawa,  Basantpur,  Block-Mainatand  wherein  it  is  

mentioned that no student having the name and particulars  

3

Page 4

of  the  first  respondent  had  ever  studied  in  the  school  in  

question and that the certificate issued in the name of the  

school  is  a  forged  document.   The  second  document  is  

another  certificate  issued  by  the  Principal,  Government  

Primary  School,  Purbi  Paukuahwa,  Block-Mainatand,  West  

Champaran,  Bihar  which states  that  the  particulars  of the  

first respondent are entered in the records of the said school  

and  that  his  date  of  birth  as  mentioned  in  the  school  

admission register is 28.11.1985.  As the controversy arising  

in the present case is capable of being resolved on the basis  

of  the  aforesaid  two  documents,  reference  to  any  other  

document would be superfluous and hence is avoided.  

8. The  first  respondent  has  not  filed  any  affidavit  or  

objections  denying  the  veracity  of  the  two  certificates  

referred to above.  However, as the Court had to be satisfied  

with  the  authenticity  of  the  said  two  documents,  on  

27.01.2014 the following order was passed.

“In order to find out the age of Respondent  No.1-accused on the date of occurrence, we  direct  the  Principal,  Government  Primary  Urdu  School,  Shekhawa,  Basantpur,  Block- Mainatand,  West  Champaran,  Bihar  and  

4

Page 5

Principal,  Government  Primary School,  Purbi  Paukuahwa,  Block-Mainatand,  West  Champaran,  Bihar  to  appear  alongwith  the  connected original record before this Court on  24th February, 2014.

List on 24th February, 2014”   

9. Pursuant  thereto  the  Principal  of  the  two  schools  

appeared in Court  today alongwith the records in original.  

The said records would indicate that there is no record of the  

first  respondent  being  enrolled  or  having  studied  in  the  

Government  Primary  Urdu  School,  Shekhawa,  Basantpur,  

Block-Mainatand.   From  the  records  of  the  Government  

Primary  School,  Purbi  Paukuahwa,  Block-Mainatand,  West  

Champaran, Bihar it is evident that the first respondent had  

enrolled  himself  in  the  said  school  on 08.01.1996 and his  

date  of  birth  is  recorded  in  the  admission  register  as  

28.11.1985.  The relevant records placed before this Court by  

the Principals of the two schools pursuant to the order dated  

27.01.2014  therefore  indicates  that  the  claim  of  the  first  

respondent to be a juvenile remains unsubstantiated and, in  

fact, the records of the school where he was enrolled would  

5

Page 6

indicate  that  his  date  of  birth  is  28.11.1985.   Properly  

calculated with reference to the date of the alleged crime,  

the first respondent was aged about 21 years on the relevant  

date and therefore he was not a juvenile.

10. We,  therefore,  cannot  sustain  the  order  dated  

14.11.2008 passed by the High Court. In the result, we allow  

this appeal and set aside the said order dated 14.11.2008  

passed  by  the  High  Court  and  restore  the  order  dated  

24.12.2007 passed by the learned Trial Court.

...…………………………CJI. [P. SATHASIVAM]

.........………………………J. [RANJAN GOGOI]

NEW DELHI, FEBRUARY  27, 2014.

6