Page 1

1

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1465 OF 2013  (@ Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No.10661 of 2010)

Ranjeet Goswami ….. Appellant

Versus

State of Jharkhand & Anr.    ….. Respondents

J U D G M E N T

K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. We  notice  with  concern  the  commission  of  large  

number of crimes by the juveniles at a time when there is a  

hue and cry to lower the age limit of juvenile in conflict with  

law  within  the  meaning  of  clause  (l)  of  Section  2  of  the  

Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000.  

Claiming  juvenility  large  number  of  applications  are  also

Page 2

2

being filed before the criminal courts and age determination  

enquiry  orders  passed  by  the  Board  themselves  result  in  

several litigations right up to this Court.  This case is also  

one among them in spite  of the various directions given by  

this Court as to how to determine the age of a juvenile in  

conflict with law in  Ashwani Kumar Saxena v.  State of  

M.P. (2012) 9 SCC 750.

3. The  appellant  herein  was  charge-sheeted  for  the  

offences  under  Sections  376,  302  and  201  of  the  Indian  

Penal  Code,  along with three others.   The appellant,  after  

submission  of  the  charge-sheet,  surrendered  before  the  

court on 13.06.2008 and filed an application before the Chief  

Judicial Magistrate, Dumka on 17.06.2008 stating that on the  

date  of  occurrence  i.e.  12/13.04.2008  he  was  a  juvenile  

since his date of birth was 10.05.1991, as per the records  

kept in the Primary School, Benagadia.

4. The CJM, Dumka forwarded the said application to the  

Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Dumka (for short  

“the  JJ  Board”)  to  conduct  an  appropriate  enquiry  and  to

Page 3

3

submit a report.  The application was registered as GR Case  

No.577  of  2008.   The  appellant  preferred  a  petition  on  

18.06.2008  before  the  Board  to  examine  the  Principal  of  

Primary  School,  Benagadiya  along  with  the  admission  

register  and also  to  examine the  person  in-charge of  the  

Head Master, as well as the head mistress of Akmit School,  

Benagadia  to  prove  his  date  of  birth.   Application  was  

allowed  on  23.06.2008,  but  on  the  same  date,  a  fresh  

petition was filed on behalf of the respondent duly endorsed  

by the APP stating that the appellant had produced a forged  

copy of the admission register.  Appellant examined Neela  

Hembrahm, who was the Head Mistress of the School since  

17.8.2006, to prove the School Leaving Certificate issued on  

10.4.2004,  by  the  then  Principal  of  the  School,  whose  

signature was identified and recognized.  Applications dated  

26.6.2008 and 31.7.2008 were also filed by the appellant for  

medical examination.  

5. The JJ  Board  then sought  the  opinion  of  the  Medical  

Board and the Board opined that the appellant was about 20

Page 4

4

years of age on the date of the incident.  There was some  

confusion  whether  the  appellant  and  one  Rajiv  Ranjan  

Goswami was the same person, but it was found otherwise,  

and  the  School  Leaving  Certificate  produced  was  not  

accepted.  The JJ Board, however, accepted the report of the  

Medical Board and passed an order on 27.3.2009, rejecting  

the application holding that the appellant was not a juvenile  

on  the  date  of  occurrence.   JJ  Board  then  forwarded  the  

report to the CJM.  Learned CJM, on accepting the report,  

committed  the  case  to  the  Sessions  Court  and  it  was  

registered as Case No.132 of 2009. Accused then preferred  

Criminal  Miscellaneous  Appeal  No.71  of  2009  before  the  

Sessions Judge,  Dumka.   Learned Sessions Judge took the  

view that the JJ Board had not assigned any cogent reasons  

for  discarding  the  School  Admission  Register  and  then  to  

accept the medical report.  Learned Judge also took the view  

that  there  was  conflicting  evidence  as  to  the  age  of  the  

accused,  hence  the  benefit  of  doubt  should  go  to  the  

accused.  The appeal was accordingly allowed and the order  

passed by the court below was set aside and a direction was

Page 5

5

given to recall the case from the Sessions Court to be tried  

by the JJ Board.   

6. The respondent aggrieved by the order, approached the  

Division Bench of the High Court by way of Criminal Revision  

No.504 of 2009.  The Criminal Revision was allowed and the  

order passed by the JJ Board was restored, setting aside the  

order  dated  30.05.2009,  passed  by  the  Sessions  Judge,  

Dumka.

7. Shri Shankar Narayanan, learned counsel appearing for  

the appellant submitted that the High Court has committed  

an  error  in  reversing  the  judgment  of  the  Sessions  Judge  

without  examining  the  correctness  or  otherwise  on  the  

school admission register, which will indicate that his date of  

birth  is  10.05.1991  and  hence  a  juvenile  on  the  date  of  

occurrence  i.e.  12/13-04-2008.   Learned  counsel  also  

submitted that the admission register was properly proved  

through  the  head  mistress  of  the  school  and  there  is  no  

reason to discard the same.  Learned counsel submitted that  

the question of accepting the report of the medical board

Page 6

6

arises only if the school leaving certificate is discarded by  

stating cogent reasons.   

8. Shri Barun Kumar Sinha, learned counsel appearing for  

the respondent, on the other hand, submitted that the High  

Court has rightly accepted the report of the medical board  

which indicated that the accused was not a juvenile on the  

date of occurrence.  Learned counsel pointed out that the  

medical board has assessed the age of the accused as 20  

years on the date of occurrence i.e. 12/13-04-2008.  Learned  

counsel also submitted that there was some confusion with  

regard to the documents produced, one document showed  

that  the  date  of  birth  of  one  Rajiv  Ranjan  Goswami  as  

10.04.1990 though the appellant’s date of birth was shown  

as 10.05.1991.  It is due to that confusion the matter was  

referred to the medical  board and medical  board,  in turn,  

opined that the age of the accused was 20 years on the date  

of occurrence.

9. We are of the view that no cogent reasons have been  

stated  by  the  High  court  to  discard  the  school  leaving

Page 7

7

certificate  which  was  issued  on  10.04.2004  by  the  then  

Principal of the school.  The certificate reveals the date of  

birth  of  the  accused  as  10.05.1991.   The  school  leaving  

certificate was proved by examining the head mistress of the  

school.  She has recognized the signatures of the principal  

who  issued  the  school  leaving  certificate.   The  evidence  

adduced  by  the  head  mistress  was  not  challenged.  

Consequently, there is no reason to discard that document.  

Further,  we  notice  that  there  was  some  confusion  as  to  

whether the appellant, whose name is Ranjeet Goswami is  

the same person Rajiv Ranjan Goswami.  The investigating  

officer’s  report  indicates  that  they  are  different  persons.  

Consequently  we  have  to  take  it  that  the  school  leaving  

certificate produced was in respect of the appellant which  

has been proved.   

10. We,  therefore,  find  no  reason  to  reject  the  school  

leaving certificate.  If that be so, as per the ratio laid down in  

Ashwani  Kumar Saxena (supra)  there is  no  question of  

subjecting  the  accused  to  a  medical  examination  by  a

Page 8

8

medical board.  Going by the school leaving certificate since  

the appellant was a juvenile on the date of occurrence, he  

can be tried only by the JJ Board.  Consequently, the order  

passed  by  the  High  Court  is  set  aside  and  that  of  the  

Sessions Judge, Dumka is restored.  The appeal is allowed,  

as stated above.

…….……………………….J. (K.S. Radhakrishnan)

……………………………J. (A.K. Sikri)

New Delhi,  September 18, 2013