PAWAN KUMAR versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

PAWAN KUMAR versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

The Supreme Court accepted the Additional Sessions Judge's 28.09.2022 finding that the appellant's date of birth as recorded in the registers of the schools first attended (05.07.1980) is reliable; given conflicting evidence (family register indicating 1975 and a bone ossification report indicating ~19 years) and the thin margin, Rule 12(3)(b) of the 2007 Rules required giving the appellant the benefit of the doubt (one year margin) and declaring him a juvenile on the date of the offence (01.12.1995); therefore while the conviction under Sections 302 and 307 IPC read with Section 34 is sustained, all sentences are quashed as juveniles cannot be sentenced under Sections 15 and 16 of the...

Parties
Appellant: Pawan Kumar; Respondent: State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
21 November 2023
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court Judgment (criminal Appeal No. 3548 of 2023)
Outcome
Appeal partly allowed
Legal Topics
Juvenility Determination, Age Determination, Rule 12(3)(b) of JJ Rules 2007, Evidentiary Value of School Certificates, Bone Ossification Test, Quashing of Sentence for Juveniles
Juvenile Justice Criminal Law Juvenility Determination Age Determination Rule 12(3)(b) of JJ Rules 2007 Evidentiary Value of School Certificates Bone Ossification Test Quashing of Sentence for Juveniles

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pawan Kumar

Appellant

State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court Judgment (criminal Appeal No. 3548 of 2023)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant was a juvenile on the date of the alleged offence (01.12.1995)
  2. 2 Proper application of Rule 12(3)(b) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007 when exact assessment of age is not possible
  3. 3 Relative evidentiary weight of school certificates, panchayat family register and medical (bone ossification) report

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court accepted the Additional Sessions Judge's 28.09.2022 finding that the appellant's date of birth as recorded in the registers of the schools first attended (05.07.1980) is reliable; given conflicting evidence (family register indicating 1975 and a bone ossification report indicating ~19 years) and the thin margin, Rule 12(3)(b) of the 2007 Rules required giving the appellant the benefit of the doubt (one year margin) and declaring him a juvenile on the date of the offence (01.12.1995); therefore while the conviction under Sections 302 and 307 IPC read with Section 34 is sustained, all sentences are quashed as juveniles cannot be sentenced under Sections 15 and 16 of the...

Court Disposition

Appeal partly allowed

Orders

  • Report of the Additional Sessions Judge dated 28.09.2022 accepted; appellant declared a juvenile on the date of the commission of the offence (01.12.1995)
  • Convictions under Sections 302 and 307 IPC read with Section 34 sustained