'Accused Juveniles Not Bound by 'First School' Certificate For Age Proof', Bombay HC Rules In Favour Of 22-Year-Old In POCSO Case

The Bombay High Court has ruled that an accused asserting to be a juvenile is not obligated to furnish a Date of Birth (DOB) certificate specifically from his "first" school to establish his age. Under the new Juvenile Justice Act 2015 (JJ Act), a certificate from any school attended by the individual can be submitted for this purpose.

The court addressed this matter in response to a plea filed by a 22-year-old challenging the trial court's directive, which required him to present the certificate from his first school to determine his age.

Case under hearing that brought about the topic in discussion

Justice SM Modak recently set aside the trial court's order, which had relied on the JJ Act and Rules framed in 2007 to decide on the man's plea. The individual faced charges from the Bhiwandi police in 2018 related to an alleged kidnapping and rape under the provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO). During his court appearance for remand, he claimed to have been a minor at the time of the alleged offense.

In response, the Sessions Court instructed him to submit documents regarding his date of birth as per Section 12(3) of the Juvenile Justice (JJ) Rules, 2007, which mandated a certificate from the school initially attended.

Court's observations

Challenging this order, the accused approached the high court, which noted that although the trial court considered Rule 12(3) of the 2007 Rules, the 2015 Act and 2016 Rules are now in effect, rendering the previous rules obsolete.

Justice Modak pointed out that the JJ Act also emphasizes an inquiry by the Court through the collection of evidence. Section 9(2) of the Act discusses conducting an inquiry by the Court, guided by the Rules. Meanwhile, Section 94(2) of the 2015 Act refers to the date of birth certificate from the school, without specifying the requirement for the certificate to be from the first school.

Consequently, the high court annulled the Sessions Court order and referred the matter back for an inquiry by the trial court under Section 94(2) of the JJ Act, 2015. The accused was granted the liberty to request his second school to produce any certificate obtained from the first school.