No Prudent Man Would Keep Quiet For 15 Years: HP High Court Rejects Suit For Specific Performance Of Oral Agreement To Sell Merely Using A Knife In A Sudden Quarrel Does Not Automatically Establish Intent To Murder: Delhi High Court Prolonged Pre-Trial Detention Violates Article 21: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail To Key Accused In Excise Policy Case Failure To Deposit Security Costs At Time Of Presentation Is An Incurable Defect Mandating Dismissal Of Election Petition: Bombay High Court Suppressing Call Records Because They "Go Against Prosecution" Creates Serious Infirmity: Madras HC Acquits Wife In Murder Case Rajasthan Appellate Tribunal Lacks Jurisdiction To Hear Compulsory Retirement Disputes: High Court High Court Cannot Appreciate Evidence Or Decide Disputed Facts To Quash Criminal Case Under Section 482 CrPC: Madras High Court Punjab & Haryana High Court Introduces 'Descending Scale Model' For POCSO Sentencing, Holds 'Younger The Victim, Higher The Sentence' Killing Over Land Dispute Without Premeditation Using Agricultural Tool Is Not Murder But Culpable Homicide: Orissa High Court Accused Cannot Be Discharged Merely On Ground Of Defective Or Tainted Investigation: Allahabad High Court Supreme Court Invokes Article 142 To End "Mahabharata" Matrimonial Battle, Quashes Lawyer-Husband's 80 Cases Against Wife And Her Advocates Grave Suspicion Sufficient To Frame Charge: J&K High Court Refuses To Discharge Officials In Kerosene Scam, Clarifies Second FIR Permissibility Defect Of Non-Speaking Review Order Cured If Appellate Court Examines And Reasons Out All Grounds: Delhi High Court Property Seller During Pendency Of Suit Does Not Lose Locus To Prosecute Case Unless Restrained By Court: Karnataka High Court Panchayat Lacks Power To Reject Factory Installation; Public Protest No Ground To Deny Statutory Permits: Kerala High Court

Estimation of Age Based on X-ray Examination Becomes Uncertain After 25 Years: Supreme Court, Denying Juvenility Claim in 1982 Murder Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgement delivered on 5th March, 2024, the Supreme Court of India dismissed a writ petition challenging a murder conviction based on the claim of juvenility at the time of the incident. The Bench comprising Justices B.R. Gavai and Sandeep Mehta ruled that the petitioner, Vinod Katara, was not a juvenile when the crime was committed in 1982.

The central legal issue revolved around determining the age of the petitioner, Vinod Katara, at the time of a murder committed on 10th September, 1982. Katara, convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, claimed he was around 15 years old at the time of the incident, seeking relief under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.

Katara's age determination was pivotal in the case. A medical report and family register entries were scrutinized to ascertain his age. A Medical Board conducted an X-ray examination in 2021 and estimated Katara to be about 56 years old at that time, implying he was around 15 in 1982. However, the Sessions Court, upon examination, found Katara's date of birth to be 2nd July, 1960, making him a major at the time of the incident.

The Supreme Court, after a detailed inquiry and assessment, found discrepancies in Katara's claim. The school records were deemed more reliable for age determination under Section 94(2) of the JJ Act, overruling the medical opinion and the family register. The Court observed that "the estimation of age based on X-ray examination becomes uncertain after 25 years," thereby questioning the reliability of the medical report presented by Katara.

The apex court found no merit in Katara's petition based on the thorough inquiry and evidence presented. It upheld the decision that Katara was not a juvenile at the time of the incident and dismissed the writ petition.

Date of Decision: 5th March, 2024.

Vinod Katara Vs. State of U.P.

 

Latest Legal News