Evidence Act, 1872

— S. 35 — Relevancy of entry in public record/register — Conditions to be fulfilled before a document is held to be admissible under S. 35, restated, (2006) 5 SCC 584-A

Evidence Act, 1872

— S. 35 — Entry as to age — School-leaving certificate produced for proving date of birth of accused — Reliability of — Said certificate not issued in ordinary course of business of school — Certificate sought to be proved by Headmaster of school who issued it — It was not original but second copy of school-leaving certificate issued after 26 years of the accused leaving school — Headmaster stating that he had no personal knowledge regarding date of birth of accused — He was not in school when accused admitted therein — No admission of Headmaster that the copy given by him was a true copy of the original certificate — No register maintained by school produced — Considering these facts and provisions of S. 35, held, the said school-leaving certificate could not be relied upon — Thus, claim of accused on the basis thereof that he was a child under the relevant Children Act and, therefore, entitled to the benefit of the said Act, not sustainable, (2006) 5 SCC 584-B

Evidence Act, 1872

— S. 35 — Entry in public record — Date of birth entered in school records — Reliability of — Held, the said entry is merely a piece of evidence — It should be authentic in nature, (2006) 5 SCC 584-C

Evidence Act, 1872

— S. 35 — Entry as to age in public record — Application of S. 35 — Determination of date of birth or age of a person — Standard of proof required under S. 35 in civil and criminal cases — Difference between, if any — Held, in the absence of any other statute operating in the said field, S. 35 will apply — Standard of proof under S. 35 in civil and criminal cases is not different but same — Therefore, until the age of a person is required to be determined in a manner laid down under a statute, different standard of proof should not be adopted in civil and criminal cases — Hence criminal court cannot entertain any evidence brought on record, (2006) 5 SCC 584-D

Criminal Trial

Juvenile/Child accused

— Grant of benefit under the relevant Juvenile/Child Act — Plea raised in relation to — Duty of court — Held, court to consider the said plea with great care on the basis of materials on record — It should not give the said benefit to a person who is not juvenile as the same would cause injustice to victim, (2006) 5 SCC 584-E

Criminal Trial

Juvenile/Child accused

— Determination of age of accused — Whether should be made on the basis of the date on which occurrence took place or when the accused is produced before the court — Pratap Singh, (2005) 3 SCC 551, reiterated in this regard, (2006) 5 SCC 584-F

Criminal Trial

Juvenile/Child accused

— Plea of appellant that he was minor on the date of occurrence — Plea raised for the first time before Supreme Court — Since appellant was a history-sheeter involved in 34 other cases, it was unlikely that he was not aware of his legal right — His father was <169>Pradhan<170> of village — Appellant was all along represented by a lawyer — No exception taken by or on behalf of appellant for joint trial where all other accused were adults — Appellant was never serious for projecting his plea of being a minor — However, Supreme Court asking trial court to determine the said plea — Trial court holding the appellant to be a minor on the basis of school-leaving certificate — Said certificate found by Supreme Court to be unreliable — On these facts, held, appeal filed claiming benefit under the relevant Children Act was liable to be dismissed, (2006) 5 SCC 584-G