/2022 INSC 0283/
NON­REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
M.A.No.1997 OF 2021
IN
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) No.5604 of 2009 
Sanjay Patel & Anr. …..Petitioners
                                Versus
The State of Uttar Pradesh                        …..Respondent
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
Sanjay Patel …..Applicant
J U D G M E N T
Abhay S. Oka, J.
1. The   applicant­petitioner   no.1   in   S.L.P.(Crl.)   No.5604   of   2009
(accused no.2) was convicted by the Sessions Court on 16 th
 May 2006
for   the   offence   punishable   under   Section   302   of   the   Indian   Penal
Code.     The   applicant   was   sentenced   to   undergo   life   imprisonment.
The   offence   was   committed   on   8 th
  January   2004.     Appeals   preferred
by the applicant and others before the High Court of Allahabad were
dismissed.   Being   aggrieved,   Special   Leave   Petitions   (Crl.)   Nos.5604­
1

5605   of   2009   were   filed   by   the   applicant   and   others.     By   the   order
dated 13 th
  August 2009, Special Leave Petition, as far as the present
applicant is concerned, was dismissed by this Court. 
The   present   Miscellaneous   Application   has   been   filed   by   the
applicant­petitioner no.1 contending that the date of his birth is 16 th
May 1986 and, therefore, on the date of commission of the offence, he
was   a   juvenile.     By   relying   upon   various   documents   such   as   High
School results declared by the Board of High School and Intermediate
Education,   Uttar   Pradesh,   the   applicant   has   claimed   that   he   was   a
juvenile on the date of the incident.
By   order   dated   31 st
  January   2022,   this   Court   directed   the
Juvenile   Justice   Board,   District   Maharajganj   to   hold   an   inquiry   into
the   claim   of   the   applicant   that   he   was   a   juvenile   on   the   date   of
commission   of   the   offence.     In   terms   of   the   said   order,   after   holding
an inquiry, the Juvenile Justice Board has passed an order dated 4 th
March 2022 holding that the correct date of birth of the applicant is
16 th
  May 1986.   Therefore, on  the date  of commission of the offence,
his age was 17 years 07 months and 23 days.  Oral and documentary
evidence   was   adduced   before   the   Juvenile   Justice   Board   during   the
course of the inquiry.  After considering the documentary evidence on
record,   the   aforesaid   finding   has   been   recorded   by   the   Juvenile
2

Justice Board.   This Order has not been challenged by the State and
is allowed to become final.
When   the   offence   was   committed,   the   provisions   of   the
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act, 2000 (‘the 2000 Act’) were
in   force.   As   per   the   2000   Act,   only   the   Juvenile   Justice   Board
constituted  under Section 4 thereof had jurisdiction  to try  a juvenile
in conflict with the law. Under Section 7A of the 2000 Act, an accused
was entitled to raise a claim of juvenility before any Court, even after
the   final   disposal   of   the   case.     Such   a   claim   was   required   to   be
determined in accordance with the provisions of the 2000 Act.   Sub­
section (2) of Section 7A provided that if after holding an inquiry, the
Court found the accused to be juvenile on the date of commission of
the offence, the Court was under a mandate to forward the juvenile to
the   Juvenile   Justice   Board   for   passing   appropriate   orders.   Sub­
section   (2)   of   Section   7A   further   provided   that   in   such   a   case,   the
sentence passed by Criminal Court shall be deemed to have no effect
in such a case.  
In   view   of   the   categorical   finding   recorded   in   this   case   by   the
competent   Juvenile   Justice   Board,   which   is   based   on   documentary
evidence,   in   view   of   sub­section   (2)   of   Section   7A,   the   applicant   is
required to be forwarded to the Juvenile Justice Board. Under Section
15 of the 2000 Act, the most stringent action which could have been
3

taken against the applicant, was of sending the applicant to a special
home for a period of three years.
The   certificate   dated   01 st
  August   2021   issued   by   Senior
Superintendent of the concerned jail at Lucknow, records that till 01 st
August 2021, the applicant has undergone the sentence for 17 years
and 03 days. Therefore, now it will be unjust to send the applicant to
the Juvenile Justice Board.
Therefore,   we   allow   the   application   and   direct   that   the
applicant   –   Sanjay   Patel,   accused   no.2   in   Sessions   Trial   No.28   of
2004 decided by the learned Sessions Judge, Maharajganj – shall be
forthwith   set   at   liberty   provided   he   is   not   required   to   be   detained
under any other order of the competent Court. 
The Miscellaneous Application is allowed in the above terms.
………………………………..J.
[A.M. KHANWILKAR]
………………………………..J.
         [ABHAY S. OKA]
New Delhi
April 13, 2022
4