Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: AHMAD SHER VS Respondent: THE STATE and anothers
Court Name: Lahore High Court Judge(s): Syed Sajjad Hussain Shah Title: AHMAD SHER vs THE STATE and anothers Case No.: Criminal Revision No,328 of 2006 Date of Judgment:2006-05-04 Reported As: 2006 P Cr. L J 1450 Result: Case remanded
Judgment ORDER ' SYED SAJJAD HUSSAIN SHAH, J.--- Petitioner Ahmad Sher through the instant petition has challenged the order dated 28-3-2006 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sargodha whereby he accepted the petition moved by respondent No,2 and declared him juvenile and directed the S.H.O. For submission of separate challan. 2. It is contended that according to section 7 of the Justice Juvenile System Ordinance, 2000, it was mandatory upon the trial Court to have ossification test of respondent No,2-accused and thereafter could only form its opinion about the age of said respondent. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No,2 opposed this petition half-heartedly and submitted that as the school leaving certificate is genuine and was not objected by the petitioner before the trial Court, therefore, the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge is correct and legal. He further submitted that respondent No,2 is ready to have ossification test as contemplated in Juvenile Justice System Ordinance, 2000. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. Section 7 of the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance, 2000 is reproduced hereunder:-- "If a question arises as to whether a person before it is a child for the purpose of this Ordinance, the Juvenile Court shall record a finding after such inquiry which shall include a medical report for determination of the age of the child." 6. A bare perusal of section would show that the provisions of having a medical report is mandatory in nature. So, it was obligatory for the trial Court to have a medical report to determine the age of the accused for the purposes of Juvenile Justice System Ordinance, 2000, I am, thus, fully convinced that the trial Court erred in not getting a report from the Medical Board of D.H.Q. For
---
## Page 2
determination of the age of the accused/respondents. Even otherwise, learned counsel for respondent No,2 has submitted that respondent No,2 is willing to have an ossification test as contemplated in the Ordinance. In these circumstances, order, dated 28-3-2006 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sargodha is set aside and case is remitted back for decision afresh in accordance with law, after having a report from Medical Board of District Headquarter Hospital with regard to the age of the accused/respondent No,2. 7. This revision is allowed in the above terms.