Juvenile Justice Act : Age Recorded By JJ Board Or CWC Deemed To Be True Age Of Accused - Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has held that for the purpose of the Juvenile Justice Act 2015, the age recorded by the Juvenile Justice Board or the Child Welfare Committee of the person so brought before it will be deemed to be the true age of the person.A Bench comprising Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice BV Nagarathna has made the observation while delivering its judgement in a plea challenging Allahabad High Court's order sustaining the judgment of the District & Sessions Court as well as of the Juvenile Justice Board declaring the accused a juvenile delinquent.In the present matter, victim of the crime had approached the Supreme Court challenging the declaration of the accused as a juvenile, arguing that the matriculation certificate can't be a conclusive document for determining the age of the juvenile irrespective of other material discrepancies in the oral testimony of the witnesses or other documents being produced.The Bench has held that the deeming provision Section 94 (3) of the JJ Act, 2015 is significant inasmuch as 'the controversy or the doubt regarding the age of the child brought before the Committee or the JJ Board is sought to be set at rest at the level of the JJ Board or the Committee itself'."The age recorded by the Committee or the Board to be the age of the person so brought before it shall for the purpose of the JJ Act, 2015 be deemed to be the true age of the person. The deeming provision in sub-section (3) of section 94 of the JJ Act, 2015 is also significant inasmuch as the controversy or the doubt regarding the age of the child brought before the Committee or the JJ Board is sought to be set at rest at the level of the JJ Board or the Committee itself"According to the Bench, while Section 94 of the Act raises a presumption regarding juvenility of the age of the child brought before the JJ board or the Committee, in case the Board or Committee has reasonable grounds about them being a child or not, it can undertake the process of determination of age by seeking evidence.Therefore the Bench has held that the presumption of the accused being a juvenile may not be drawn when the Committee or the Board has reasonable grounds for doubt regarding the person brought before it is a child or not. "Thus, in the initial stage a presumption that the child brought before the Committee or the JJ Board is a juvenile has to be drawn by the said authorities. The said presumption has to be drawn on observation of the child, However, the said presumption may not be drawn when the Committee or the Board has reasonable grounds for doubt regarding the person brought before it is a child or not." the Bench said.The Bench has also specified the evidence on which the process of age determination can be done by the Board in cases of such doubts:(i) Date of birth certificate from the school or the matriculation certificate from the concerned board, if available or in the absence thereof(ii) The birth certificate given by a corporation or by a municipal authority or a panchayat and in the absence of the above(iii) Age has to be determined by an ossification test or any other medical age determination test conducted on the orders of the committee or the board.The Bench noted that in the instant case, there is no other document indicating the date of birth of the person contrary to what has been indicated in the matriculation certificate and therefore such a discrepancy in the date of birth does not arise.While noting that no contra evidence to the documents produced by the second respondent have been produced by the appellant, the Bench refused to differ from the order of the High court.In the present case, the Juvenile Justice Board had observed that a letter dated 22nd July 2020 issued by the Office of the Administrative Officer, Intermediate Education Council, Meerut, UP, revealed that the date of birth of accused had rightly been recorded as 25.09.2004 in the High School mark-sheet, and he was 15 years and 8 months of age as on the date of the incident.Through its order dated 11th November 2020, the JJ Board declared the accused as a juvenile delinquent in case for offences under sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 307, 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The District and Sessions Court and High Court sustained the Board's order holding that section 94 of the JJ Act, 2015 had been complied with in the instant case inasmuch as the matriculation or equivalent certificate from the concerned Examination Board had indicated his date of birth to be 25.09.2004.Therefore, it was held by the impugned order that Sub-section 2 of Section 94 of the JJ Act, 2015 applies in the present case as there were no reasonable ground to doubt the said document, and in the absence of there being any evidence to negate the same, the criminal revision was dismissed.Principles relating to determination of juvenilityThe judgment authored by Justice Nagarathna also summarized the principles relating to...

Juvenile Justice Act : Age Recorded By JJ Board Or CWC Deemed To Be True Age Of Accused - Supreme Court

Srishti Ojha

Tags