MEHR ALI vs MUHAMMAD NAVEED and others
This matter concerns the proper procedure for determining the age of an accused person to establish juvenile status under the law. The core legal question was whether a medical board consisting solely of three radiologists is sufficient to determine an accused's age for the purposes of the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance, 2000. The Court held that such a board was not constituted properly, as it lacked the necessary multidisciplinary expertise required for an accurate age assessment. Consequently, the Court set aside the impugned order and directed the Medical Superintendent of Services Hospital, Lahore, to constitute a comprehensive medical board comprising the Medical Superintendent, a Senior Radiologist, a Dental Surgeon, an Orthopedic Surgeon, and a Professor of Medicine. The Court established the principle that in all cases involving the determination of juvenile status, a multidisciplinary medical board must be constituted to ensure a reliable medical report, which the trial court must then consider alongside other evidence to record a finding on the accused's age.
- Is a medical board consisting only of radiologists sufficient to determine the age of an accused for juvenile status?
- What is the required composition of a medical board for determining the age of an accused under the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance 2000?
- Section 7, Juvenile Justice System Ordinance 2000
ORDER
' Dr. Riaz Ahmad Chaudh-ry, Medical Superintendent, Services Hospital, Lahore present in 'Court submits that there was no order from the learned trial Court to constitute a special Medical Board in order to .Determine the age of the present respondent. He further submits that three Radiologists were directed to examine the respondent in order, to determine his age.
2. On the other hand, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that for the determination of the age five special doctors should be there, that's, Medical Superintendent of the Hospital, Radiologist, Dental Surgeon, Orthopedic Surgeon and the doctor who determine the physical appearance of the accused.
3. On the other hand, learned Addl. A.-G also does not agree with the submission made by Medical Superintendent, Services Hospital, Lahore. He also submits that besides the Radiologist, Dental Surgeon is very necessary because he has to examine the teeth of accused in order to determine his age..
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent submits that in this case birth certificate of the accused/respondent was producedand that was sufficient enough to determine the age of the accused. He further submits that no case for interference is made out.
5. I have heard [earned counsel for the parties. I had summoned the record and had also seen the report of three Radiologists. I have also seen for the first time in this case that only a Board of three Radiologists was constituted for the determination of age of the accused/respondent. According to section 7 Juvenile Justice System Ordinance, 2000, "whenever a question arises as to whether a person before the Court is a juvenile or not, there shall record a finding after such inquiry which shall include a medical report for determination of the age of the child".
6. After hearing the 1,7arned counsel for the parties, I am of considered opinion that the Board was not constituted properly, therefore, this petition is accepted and the order impugned is set aside. I direct Medical Superintendent, Services Hospital to constitute a Board consisting of Medical Superintendent, i.e. Himself, Senior Radiologist, Dental Surgeon, Orthopedic Surgeon and a Professor of Medicine so that the actual age of the accused may come on record. This procedure and practice shall be adopted in all such-like cases in future also. After examining the accused/respondent, the Board shall submit his report before the learned trail Court, who would decide the matter after perusing the said report in accordance with law. The accused/respondent shall be produced by the Superintendent Camp Jail, Lahore before Medical Superintendent, Services Hospital, Lahore on 29-4-2004 at 10-00 a.m. In his office. Learned Addl. A.-G. Will inform about the order of this Court to Superintendent Camp Jail, Lahore. Copy of this order shall also be sent to Medical Superintendent, Services Hospital, Lahore. This petition stands disposed of.
Cited by 4 cases
- MUHAMMAD FAIZAN RIFFAT ULLAH KHAN vs STATE and another PLJ 2016 Cr.C. (Islamabad) 381
- MUHAMMAD FAIZAN RIFFAT ULLAH KHAN vs The STATE and another K.L.R. 2016 Criminal Cases 109, PLJ 2016 Cr.C. (Islamabad) 381, 2016 P Cr. L J
- Muhammad Faizan Riffat Ullah Khan vs The State, etc. K.L.R. 2016 Criminal Cases 109
- MUHAMMAD FAIZAN RIFFAT ULLAH KHAN Versus State 2016 PCrLJ 638