Radha DeviversusThe State of Bihar

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                            CRIMINAL REVISION No.489 of 2024
        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-56 Year-2023 Thana- SIMRI BAKHTIYARPUR District-
                                             Saharsa
     ======================================================
     Radha Devi W/o Vivek Roy @ Vivek Ray Resident Of Village Sakrauli, Ward
     No 2 Panchayat Sardiha, PS Bakhtiyarpur District- Saharsa

                                                                     ... ... Petitioner/s
                                            Versus]

1.   The State of Bihar
2.   Mithun Kumar Sah S/o Chunchun Sah R/o Village-Sakraouli Ward No.2,
     Panchayat Sardiha, P.S.-SimriBakhtiyarpur, District-saharsa

                                               ... ... Respondent/s
     ======================================================
     Appearance :
     For the Petitioner/s      :        Mr.Diwakar Prasad Singh, Advocate
     For the State             :        Mr.Ashok Kumar Singh, APP
     ======================================================
     CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
                     ORAL JUDGMENT
      Date : 06-02-2026

                        Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

                      2.      Despite    service      of   notice,   there    is    no

      representation on behalf of opposite party no. 2.

                      3. The instant criminal revision has been preferred

      against the order dated 23.01.2024 passed by learned Juvenile

      Justice Board, Saharsa in connection with Simri Bakhtiyarpur

      P.S. Case No. 56 of 2023 by which the opposite party no. 2 was

      declared juvenile on the basis of forged certificate.

                      4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

      the opposite party no. 2 and other co-accused persons

      committed rape with the minor daughter of the petitioner after
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.489 of 2024 dt.06-02-2026
                                            2/5




         taking her out forcibly in absence of the petitioner. Simri

         Bakhtiyarpur P.S. Case No. 56 of 2023 was registered initially

         under Sections 363, 366A, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and

         Sections 8 & 12 of the POCSO Act. Subsequently, Sections 376

         IPC and 4 of POCSO Act were also added. Learned counsel

         further submits that the opposite party no. 2, who is one of the

         accused persons, claimed himself to be a juvenile and his age

         was assessed by the learned Juvenile Justice Board to be 15

         years 01 month 12 days and vide order dated 23.01.2024 the

         opposite party no. 2 was declared juvenile. Learned counsel

         further submits that the age of the opposite party no. 2 was

         assessed on the basis of mark-sheet issued by the Bihar School

         Examination Board in which the date of birth of opposite party

         no. 2 was mentioned as 05.09.2007 but the said mark-sheet was

         forged. Learned counsel further submits that, however,

         subsequently the said document was removed from the record

         and another document from the school first attended showing

         date of birth of opposite party no. 2 has been annexed with the

         record in most illegal manner. Even in the document

         subsequently annexed, there is clear manipulation in the date of

         birth of opposite party no. 2 which is apparent on the face of

         record. There is no manipulation in the date of birth of any of
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.489 of 2024 dt.06-02-2026
                                            3/5




         the children whose names have been mentioned in the said

         document except this opposite party no. 2. These facts go on

         show that the age of the opposite party no. 2 was assessed on the

         basis of completely forged document and he was declared

         juvenile without following the procedure under Section 9(2)

         read with Section 103(1) of Juvenile Justice (Care and

         Protection of Children) Act, 2015. Learned counsel further

         submits that the order of the learned trial court dated 23.01.2024

         is based on a mark-sheet issued by the Bihar School

         Examination Board but no such document is on record and for

         this reason, the petitioner could not get the certified copy of the

         said document. Even when application has been filed under RTI,

         no document was furnished. Thus, learned counsel submits that

         the order declaring the opposite party no. 2 a juvenile be set

         aside and the learned trial court is directed to conduct proper

         enquiry in the matter.

                        5. Perused the records.

                        6. From perusal of Annexure-P/7, it is clearly

         manifest that manipulation has been made in the date of birth of

         opposite party no. 2 and the said document is stated to be a

         document issued by the school first attended. From perusal of

         the impugned order, I find that the said order has been passed on
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.489 of 2024 dt.06-02-2026
                                            4/5




         the basis of some mark-sheet produced by the elder brother of

         opposite party no. 2 mentioning the age of opposite party no. 2

         05.09.2007. Since the occurrence is stated to have taken place

         on 17.10.2022, the learned trial court on simple calculation

         declared opposite party no. 2 to be a juvenile. However, no

         report has been called for either from the institution issuing the

         mark-sheet or from any other authority and the document was

         not verified. Moreover, as submitted by learned counsel for the

         petitioner regarding the said document being not available on

         record of the learned Juvenile Justice Board, it is a very serious

         matter.

                        7. Though the opposite party no. 2 was given

         opportunity to put up his case before this Court, there is no

         representation on behalf of opposite party no. 2 despite service

         of notice and hence, this Court intends to move forward and

         pass appropriate orders even in absence of opposite party no. 2.

                        8. Finding sufficient merit in the submission of

         learned counsel for the petitioner regarding there being apparent

         manipulation in the date of birth in the document produced

         before the learned Juvenile Justice Board regarding claim of age

         of opposite party no. 2 and further considering the submission

         of the petitioner about there being no document on the record of
             Patna High Court CR. REV. No.489 of 2024 dt.06-02-2026
                                                         5/5




                      learned Juvenile Justice Board based on which the impugned

                      order has been passed, I am of the view that the matter needs

                      reconsideration by the learned Juvenile Justice Board. Further, it

                      is apparent that no enquiry under Section 9(2) read with Section

                      103(1) of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act,

                      2015 has been made by the learned Juvenile Justice Board and

                      therefore, I think it fit and proper to set aside the order dated

                      23.01.2024 and remand the matter before the Juvenile Justice

                      Board, Saharsa for fresh consideration.

                                     9. Accordingly, the present criminal revision

                      petition stands allowed.




                                                 (Arun Kumar Jha, J)

  DKS/-
AFR/NAFR                NAFR
CAV DATE                NA
Uploading Date          10.02.2026
Transmission Date       10.02.2026