12 Years After Arrest, Rajasthan High Court Says Jaipur Bomb Blast Convict Was Juvenile On Date Of Occurrence

The Rajasthan High Court has set aside District & Sessions Judge, Jaipur Metropolitan's order by which it had quashed Juvenile Justice Board's decision to declare Mohd Salman, who was a convict in Jaipur Bomb Blasts case of 2008, to be a juvenile on the date of occurrence.

Salman and other convicts were acquitted by the court on Wednesday in a common decision on merits in their appeals . He was arrested in the case in November 2008. 

While deciding Salman's revision plea on the question of juvenility, the division bench of Justice Pankaj Bhandari and Justice Sameer Jain said:

“Juvenile Justice Board has not committed any illegality or error in determining the age of Salman and considering him to be a minor on the date of the alleged incident. Learned Sessions Judge has clearly exceeded his power by commenting on the order passed by his predecessor and directing the Juvenile Justice Board to determine the age of Salman in the light of Section 2(g) of the Act of 2000.”

An application was filed on behalf of accused Mohammad Salman on March 11, 2011 for determination of his age. The application was decided by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur vide its order dated June 21, 2011 and accused Salman was considered to be more than 18 years old.

An appeal was filed on behalf of Salman before the Sessions Judge and the Sessions Judge, Jaipur Metropolitan vide its order dated February 2, 2013 directed the Juvenile Justice Board to decide the application in accordance with Section 2(g) of the Act of 2000 after affording opportunity of hearing to both the parties.

The Juvenile Justice Board vide order dated March 12, 2014, after considering the evidence and the documents produced before it came to the conclusion that Salman was a juvenile in conflict with law as on the date of the alleged Jaipur blast. Aggrieved by the said order, the State preferred an appeal before the Sessions Judge. The Sessions Judge vide its order dated April 15, 2014 has set aside the order of the Juvenile Justice Board dated March 12, 2014.

The division bench observed:

“We are of the considered view that the learned Sessions Judge was not competent to make a comment on the earlier order passed by the Sessions Judge dated 11.02.2013 for the very reason that the learned Sessions Judge was not sitting as an appellate court over the order passed by his predecessor. It is also pertinent to note that the order dated 11.02.2013 passed by the learned Sessions Judge was not challenged by the State as well as the accused before the High Court and had thus attained finality.”

The court noted that the material, which was available on record before the Juvenile Justice Board was a statement of Salman's mother Ishrat Jahan wherein she had stated that he was born on February 9, 1992. However, in the matriculation certificate the date of birth of Salman was mentioned as October 3, 1992.

The court averred that as per Rule 12 of the Rules of 2007, the date of birth mentioned in the board certificate is to be given preference and if the same is not available, then the date of birth mentioned in the school first attended is to be considered.

“Since the reason for the mistake in entry of date of birth in the metric certificate has been explained by Mohammad Sajid (AW-6), the date of birth mentioned in the school first attended i.e. 09.02.1992 can be considered as the actual date of birth of Mohammad Salman,” said the court.

“However, even if, the date of birth mentioned in the school first attended or the date of birth mentioned in the metric are to be considered in either case Salman was a juvenile on the date of incident, which is May 2008. However, even if, the date of birth mentioned in the school first attended (i.e. February 9, 1992) is to be considered, Salman was aged 16 years and 3 months; however, if the board certificate is to be considered (i.e. October 3, 1992), Salman was aged 15 years and 7 months, in either case, Salman was a juvenile on the date of alleged bomb blasts,” the court observed further.

The court said it is of the considered view that the Sessions Judge committed grave illegality in allowing the appeal filed by the State.

"We thus, set aside the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge and the order passed by the Juvenile Justice Board is upheld. Petitioner - Salman is thus, considered to be a juvenile on the date of occurrence of Jaipur bomb blast," it said, while allowing the revision petition.

Case Title: Mohd. Salman v. State of Rajasthan

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Raj) 21

Coram: Justice Pankaj Bhandari and Justice Sameer Jain

Click Here to Read/Download Judgment