Special Judge Jhansi rejected the revisionist's plea to declare him a juvenile, relying on contradictory school records and a medical age report. The High Court found the impugned order sustainable on facts.
The Criminal Revision is dismissed and the order dated 16.05.2011 is upheld.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 49
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2453 of 2011
Revisionist :- Jitendra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr. Counsel for Revisionist :- V.S. Parmar Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Jai Singh Parihar
Hon'ble Vivek Agarwal,J.
Order Date :- 8.9.2021 Ravi/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Criminal Revision against the rejection of declaration of the accused as a juvenile should be allowed.
Whether the Special Judges order relying on contradictory school evidence and medical age determination report is legally unsustainable.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Jitendra
State Of U.P. And Anr.
Vivek Agarwal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
