Rajasthan High Court Calls For Legal Training Of Police On Age Determination In POCSO, Juvenile Cases
The Rajasthan High Court has observed that the Rajasthan Director General of Police (DGP) should consider imparting extensive legal training to investigating officers handling POCSO cases and matters relating to juveniles, after finding that the statutory procedure for age determination had not been followed in a case before it.The Bench of Justice Ashok Kumar Jain made the observation...
The Rajasthan High Court has observed that the Rajasthan Director General of Police (DGP) should consider imparting extensive legal training to investigating officers handling POCSO cases and matters relating to juveniles, after finding that the statutory procedure for age determination had not been followed in a case before it.
The Bench of Justice Ashok Kumar Jain made the observation while granting bail in a POCSO case, after it found that contrary to the procedure prescribed under law, the opinion regarding the victim's age had been given by a Medical Officer of a Community Health Centre (CSC) instead of a Medical Board.
In the present case, the victim's age was disputed. While her Jan Aadhaar Card reflected her age as 18 years, the complainant stated that the doctor had assessed her age to be between 15 and 16 years. The victim, in her testimony, stated that the doctor had suggested her age to be between 18 and 19 years.
The Court noted that there was no documentary record establishing the victim's age. Instead, the police relied upon an ossification test conducted by a Medical Officer at CSC Khajuwala, Bikaner, which estimated her age to be between 15 and 18 years. Observing that the victim's age required consideration during trial and taking into account other relevant factors, the Court granted bail to the accused.
Before parting with the matter, the Court referred to Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, which lays down the procedure for determination of age. It observed that investigating agencies must be aware of and comply with the statutory provisions governing age determination while investigating offences involving children, as failure to do so affects the justice delivery system.
The Court also relied on the Supreme Court's decisions in Rajni v. State of U.P. and Shah Nawaj v. State of U.P., noting that an ossification test can be resorted to only in the absence of the documents specified under Section 94 of the JJ Act, and that medical opinion from a Medical Board is to be obtained only as a measure of last resort where documentary proof is unavailable.
In this backdrop, the Court held that the opinion on the victim's age given by a Medical Officer, instead of a Medical Board, was not in accordance with the provisions of the JJ Act or the POCSO Act. It observed,
"It simply means that police is not aware about the legal provision and police infact require extensive training when it comes to compliance of legal provision. It is duty of the trial Court as well to point out the defect at very initial stage and same can be cured during investigation but after beginning of trial the defect cannot be cured."
Accordingly, the Court expressed its expectation that the Director General of Police, Rajasthan, would consider imparting extensive training to investigating officers conducting investigations in POCSO cases and matters relating to juveniles, and directed that a copy of the order be forwarded to the DGP for compliance.
Title: Shankar Ram v State of Rajasthan
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 314