The Bombay High Court recently ruled on a significant matter related to the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 (JJ Act). The court determined that, as per the JJ Act, it is not mandatory for an accused individual to present a birth certificate from their initial school to prove juvenility. This decision came as a response to a Writ Petition challenging a Trial Court order that had directed the accused to furnish a birth certificate from their first school.

Advocate Saugata Hazra represented the petitioner, who was facing charges under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act). The petitioner, arrested at the age of 17, sought the transfer of proceedings to a Juvenile Court but was instructed by the Trial Court to provide a birth certificate from the first school.

The High Court, in its judgment delivered by Justice S. M. Modak, emphasized that the JJ Act does not explicitly state that the birth certificate must be from the first school. The court referred to Rule 12(3) of Juvenile Justice Rules, 2007 (JJ Rules), which mandates an inquiry to determine the juvenile's age and lists various documents, including a birth certificate from the school.

It was noted that the Trial Court considered Rule 12(3) of the JJ Rules, which had been replaced by the JJ Act of 2015 and JJ Rules of 2016. The High Court also highlighted Section 9(2) of the JJ Act, which requires a court-conducted inquiry, and Section 94(2) specifying a date of birth certificate from the school without specifying it must be from the first school.

Consequently, the Bombay High Court decided to remand the case back to the Trial Court for a proper inquiry, setting aside the previous order. This judgment provides clarity on the interpretation of the JJ Act regarding the submission of birth certificates in cases involving juveniles.

Case: Tohid Rehman Shaikh v The State of Maharashtra,

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION (ST) NO.21681 OF 2023.