GUWAHATI, India, Nov. 5 -- Gauhati High Court issued the following order on Oct. 8:

1. Heard Mr. F. Haque, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S. H. Bora, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam and Ms. R. Choudhury, learned Amicus Curiae appearing for respondent No.2.

2. This application has been filed under Sections 442/438 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for quashing the order dated 03.06.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge (POCSO), Biswanath, Biswanath Chariali in Spl. (P) Case No. 41/2025.

3. The petitioner claimed to be a child in conflict with law on the day of occurrence. Therefore, he filed an application under section 9(2) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. He produced school certificate and other documents. It has been mentioned in those documents that the petitioner was born on 25.01.2009 which shows that on 03.06.2025, he was 16 (sixteen) years 4 (four) months and 19 (nineteen) days old.

4. The trial court refused to accept the plea of the petitioner that the petitioner was child in conflict with law on the day of occurrence on two grounds. The first ground is that the Investigating Officer forwarded the report stating that the age of the petitioner was 19 (nineteen) years and the second ground is that the petitioner himself claimed that he is 19 (nineteen) years old. Moreover, the physical appearance of the petitioner did not suggest that he was a minor under the age of 18 (eighteen) years.

5. The FIR was lodged at Bongaigaon police station on 19.04.2025 by the informant with the allegation that the accused/petitioner, Ajmal Ali had committed sexual assault by way of rape upon the minor daughter of the informant on the pretext of love relationship and later threatened her also. It is also alleged that the act of the accused led to pregnancy of the girl.

6. Initially, case was registered at Bongaigaon PS zero FIR and thereafter, it was sent to Behali PS whereupon it is registered as Behali PS Case No. 44/2025 under Section 64(2) BNS read with Section 6 of POCSO Act.

7. The investigation of the case resulted in a charge-sheet and presently the Special Court is seized of the proceeding in Special POCSO Case No. 41/2024. As already stated above, the petitioner raised the plea of juvenility before the learned Sessions Court which, however, came to be rejected vide order dated 03.06.2025 as stated above. Before proceeding further, the contents of Section 9(2) and section 94 of The Juvenile Justice (Care And Protection Of Children) Act, 2015(hereinafter referred as JJ Act) may be reproduced herein below:

"9 (2) In case a person alleged to have committed an offence claims before a court other than a Board, that the person is a child or was a child on the date of commission of the offence, or if the court itself is of the opinion that the person was a child on the date of commission of the offence, the said court shall make an inquiry, take such evidence as may be necessary (but not an affidavit) to determine the age of such person, and shall record a finding on the matter, stating the age of the person as nearly as may be:

Provided that such a claim may be raised before any court and it shall be recognised at any stage, even after final disposal of the case, and such a claim shall be determined in accordance with the provisions contained in this Act and the rules made there under even if the person has ceased to be a child on or before the date of commencement of this Act."

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=A9S7c5LDIsB6RXaCf816xw%2BAWt841uICoB5wrrmUR%2Bn4k2Vj6uB%2BzVTha6yseHzh&caseno=Crl.Rev.P./262/2025&cCode=1&cino=GAHC010145302025&state_code=6&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.