New Delhi [India], June 10 (ANI): Dwarka District Court on Tuesday set aside the order of Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) declaring an accused a minor in connection with the alleged murder of Tarun on the day of Holi in the Uttam Nagar area. This incident took place on March 4 this year.
An FIR was lodged at the Uttam Nagar Police Station.
The court set aside the order passed by the JJB on April 8 on the basis of documents received from the school in view of the production of the Birth Certificate issued by the MCD. This certificate was produced before the court by the father of the deceased.
However, the father of the minor accused called the certificate a forged one, generated by the brother of the deceased.
“In view of the above discussion, order of April 8, 2026, is hereby set aside and matter remanded back to JJB, with directions to conduct fresh inquiry regarding the age of Child in Conflict with Law (CCL) by keeping in view the point discussed in this order, ” ASJ Rajat Goyal ordered on June 9.
While remanding the matter, the court observed, “In the instant case, it is clear that the basis of recording date of birth of CCL ‘F’ as October 7, 2011, in the school record was not examined by JJB before passing the said order.”
Further, the birth certificate of CCL ‘F’ issued by MCD, a copy of which has been filed in the present appeal, mentions his date of birth as October 7, 2007, instead of October 7, 2011, the court noted.
The said birth certificate is stated to have been verified by the IO.
However, during the course of arguments, counsel for CCL ‘F’ has produced a copy of another birth certificate of CCL ‘F’, in which his date of birth is reflected as October 7, 2011.
It is alleged by the appellant that the certificate relied upon by the appellant is forged and fabricated.
Thus, it is clear that there are various documents containing conflicting dates of birth with respect to respondent/CCL ‘F’ in this matter.
“In such circumstances, the order whereunder finding with respect to age of CCL ‘F’ has been given only on the basis of his school record, without considering the aspect as to whether the said school record is supported by any foundational documents and also without considering the effect of birth certificates (one produced by the appellant and another produced on behalf of CCL ‘F’ himself), cannot be sustained,” the court noted.
Father of the deceased, appellant Maan Singh, challenged the order passed on April 8, declaring CCL ‘F’ as a ‘child’ in the present appeal.
It is the case of the appellant that the school record relied upon by JJB does not fall within the category of ‘date of birth certificate from the school’ mentioned in section 94(2)(i) JJ Act, 2015.
Senior advocate Amit Chaddha alongwith Sumit Kumar, Shrey Sehrawat and Ayush Tanwar, appeared for the father of the deceased Tarun.
The counsel for the appellant, who forged and fabricated the school record, has been relied upon by JJB to wrongly conclude that the date of birth of CCL ‘F’ is October 7, 2011. He argued that the date of birth of CCL ‘F’ is actually October 7, 2007, as duly noted in the birth certificate issued by the MCD.
In view of the same, the appellant has argued that the order of April 8 be set aside.
Delhi Police has filed a charge sheet against the accused persons, including the minor. JJB is considering the matter regarding the minor accused. (ANI)
The article has been published through a syndicated feed. Except for the headline, the content has been published verbatim. Liability lies with original publisher.