Mst. SHABANA KAUSAR vs FARHAN AHMAD
This revision petition challenged an order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bahawalpur, which declared the respondent/accused a juvenile, thereby entitling him to be tried under the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance, 2000. The complainant contended that the accused was over 18 years of age at the time of the occurrence (24-3-2002). The core legal question was whether the respondent qualified as a juvenile based on the evidence of his age. The High Court, after reviewing the record, noted that while the respondent relied on a School Leaving Certificate and Form 'B', these documents lacked the authenticity of a birth certificate. Crucially, two separate medical reports, including one commissioned by the High Court with the concurrence of both parties, consistently estimated the respondent's age at 20 to 22 years. Additionally, the Court observed the respondent's physical appearance. Consequently, the Court held that the respondent was not a juvenile at the time of the offence. The impugned order was set aside, and the respondent's application for juvenile status was dismissed.
- Can a School Leaving Certificate or Form 'B' be treated as equivalent to a birth certificate for determining juvenile status?
- Is a medical board report regarding the age of an accused binding when it contradicts documentary evidence like a school certificate?
- Does the physical appearance of an accused in court constitute a relevant factor in determining age for the purposes of the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance, 2000?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Juvenile Justice System Ordinance, 2000
' This revision petition is directed against the order dated 28-10-2002 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bahawalpur whereby application brought by Farhan Ahmad accused/respondent No,1 for treating him as Juvenile was accepted.
2. The brief facts of the case are that case F.I.R. No,76 of 2002 under section 302, P.P.C. Was registered against Farhan Ahmad respondent/accused at the instance of Mst. Shabana Kausar, petitioner/complainant and after usual investigation he (respondent) was challaned. During pendency of case accused filed application for determination of his age, which was accepted vide order dated 28-10-2002 and it was found that accused/respondent was juvenile and trial shall be conducted in accordance with Juvenile Justice System Ordinance, 2000. Now Mst. Shabana Kausar, complainant has filed this revision petition.
3. I have heard the arguments and perused the record.
4. The case of petitioner/complainant is that on the day of occurrence (24-3-2002) the age of accused/respondent, Farhan Ahmad was more than 18 years, therefore, impugned order is illegal and liable to be set aside. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the case of Hassan Zafar v. The State 2001 PCr.LJ 1939. However, the case of respondent is that according to School Leaving Certificate and Form 'B' of Registration Department his age was below 18 years.
5. As mentioned above the case was registered against Farhan Ahmad, respondent on 24-3-2002 at the instance of Mst. Shabana Kausar, petitioner. The case of respondent/accused is that on the day of occurrence (24-3-2002) his age was below 18 years. He has produced School Leaving Certificate and Form 'B' in support of his version. The perusal of record shows that learned trial Court had constituted Medical Board on the application of respondent/accused and according to report of Medical Board dated 14-9-2002 his age was about 20 to 22 years. The case of petitioner/complainant is that at the time of occurrence age of accused/respondent was 20 to 22 years. As stated above according to report of Medical Board too his age was between 20 to 22 years. So Medical Board has contradicted the version of accused.
6. It is pertinent to note that on 8-4-2003 learned counsel for the parties submitted before this Court that in the circumstances of the case it would be proper to obtain report about age of accused from the Medical Superintendent, B.V. Hospital, Bahawalpur after constituting a Board.
They further submitted that they would not raise objection about the report given by the said Board. So with the concurrence of learned counsel for the parties the M.S., B.V. Hospital, Bahawalpur was directed to constitute Medical Board for determination of age of accused. The said Medical Board has submitted report in this Court. According to this report age of accused/respondent is about 20 to 22 years. Now accused/respondent cannot raise objection about the same. So it is clear that at the time of occurrence his age was more than 18 years. Even otherwise as stated earlier according to report of Medical Board dated 14-9-2002 his age was 20 to 22 years. In these circumstances I find that at the time of occurrence age of Farhan Ahmad (accused/respondent) was more than 18 years. The accused/respondent has relied upon School Leaving Certificate and Form 'B' of the Registration Department but the same cannot be equated with a birth certificate. As such in the circumstances of the case reliance on aforesaid documents (School Leaving Certificate and Form 'B') is not safe as the same have no authenticity.
7. The most important aspect of the case is that Farhan Ahmad, respondent/accused was present in Court on 7-5-2003 and from the general appearance his age is more than 18 years. In these circumstances, I find that impugned order is not sustainable in the eyes of law.
8. The upshot of the above discussion is that this revision petition is accepted, impugned order is set aside and application brought by respondent/accused is accordingly dismissed.
Cited by 6 cases
- SAJJAD SERHANI vs The STATE and another 2017 P Cr. L J 474
- MUHAMMAD BASIT Versus State 2016 PCrLJ 1745
- SAJJIDA BIBI vs WASEEM AHMED and 2 others 2013 YLR 804
- MUHAMMAD NAEEM vs THE STATE And 2 Others 2011 YLR 2610
- ZAFAR IQBAL vs MUHAMMAD MUDASSAR 2006 MLD 396
- SHEHAR YAR alias SHAHRI vs THE STATE and anothers 2006 YLR 10