In a significant ruling, the Allahabad High Court has expressed serious concerns over the increasing trend of accused individuals manipulating their date of birth in criminal proceedings to claim juvenile status. The court highlighted the necessity for stringent age verification processes as mandated under Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, to uphold the integrity of the juvenile justice system.
The case in question involved an accused booked under various sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The First Information Report (FIR) alleged that the accused had enticed away a 16-year-old girl. However, the accused contended that the girl was 18 years old and had left her home voluntarily after being reprimanded by her parents. The defense further pointed to the victim's statements under Sections 180 and 183 of the BNSS, where she claimed to be a consenting adult.
Justice Krishan Pahal, presiding over the matter, noted with concern the laxity of law enforcement agencies in conducting proper age verification. The court criticized the failure to adhere to its earlier directives, which had instructed the Chief Medical Officer (CMO) of Ballia to constitute a medical board for conducting an ossification test to determine the victim's age. The bench was informed that the CMO had not complied with this order, citing the unavailability of a qualified radiologist in the district.
The court emphasized that such lapses in healthcare infrastructure not only delay justice but also undermine the credibility of the juvenile justice system. It called upon the Uttar Pradesh government to take immediate steps to address these issues. Specifically, the court directed the police to strictly adhere to Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice Act and undergo appropriate training to ensure compliance. Additionally, the Health Department was instructed to appoint or depute at least one radiologist in the Ballia district to facilitate timely medical age determination tests.
Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice Act outlines the procedure for age determination of individuals claiming to be juveniles. The provision mandates that age should primarily be determined based on documentary evidence such as birth certificates or school records. If such documents are unavailable, medical tests like ossification tests may be conducted. The court reiterated that reliance on documents not recognized under the Act, such as Aadhaar cards or voter IDs, is inappropriate for age determination purposes.
This ruling underscores the judiciary's commitment to ensuring that the provisions of the Juvenile Justice Act are implemented effectively and that the rights of genuine juveniles are protected. It also serves as a cautionary note against the misuse of legal provisions through the submission of manipulated or dubious documents. The court's directives aim to strengthen the mechanisms for age verification, thereby preserving the integrity of the juvenile justice system and ensuring that justice is served appropriately.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.