Age inquiry is a crucial aspect, having a direct impact on the rights of the accused. As per Sec. 2(13) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 an accused who is less than 18 years of age on the date of commission of offence needs to be dealt as Child in Conflict with Law.
Therefore, age determination of the accused is necessary at the earliest possible opportunity. The Delhi High in Court in Court On Its Own Motion vs. Department of Women & Child Development (2012 SCC OnLine Del 1718) mandated that a police officer after arresting the accused is mandated to prepare an ‘Age Memo’.
When a young person is apprehended/arrested and he is produced before the Magistrate, it will be the duty of the Magistrate to order ascertainment of the age of such a person. The Magistrate shall, in all such cases, undertake this exercise, where the young person from his/her looks appears to be below 18 years of age and also in all those cases, wherein the age in the arrest memo is stated to be 18-21 years. The Supreme Court in Gopinath vs. State of West Bengal (1984 Supp SCC 228) mandated that a preliminary inquiry in this behalf shall be undertaken of all these young persons whose age is stated to be up to 21 years.
In cases, where on the first appearance, the Magistrate is doubtful about the age of accused and when the accused from his appearance looks to be under 18 years, the Magistrate, exercising abundant caution, may send the accused to an observation home instead of regular prison, till the time the age inquiry is finalized.
There can be an instance where the investigating officer wrongly mentions the age of accused in the Age Memo. An accused placed in that situation may request the Magistrate/Court to conduct his Age Inquiry.
Procedure
Sec. 94 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) of Children Act, 2015 provides the procedure for conducting the age inquiry of accused. While conducting age inquiry, Court cannot consider all and sundry documents to determine the age of the accused. The reliance has to be made on the documents which are mandated by the legislation. The documents which need to be considered for age determination in the preferential order are as follows:
a. the date of birth certificate from the school, or the matriculation or equivalent certificate from the concerned examination Board, if available; and in the absence thereof;
b. the birth certificate given by a corporation or a municipal authority or a panchayat;
c. and only in the absence of (a) and (b) above, age shall be determined by an ossification test or any other latest medical age determination test.
Ossification Test
The Court shall order for age determination of accused by ossification test only after recording its satisfaction to the effect that no other age proof as stipulated in point (a) and (b) above are available. When an investigating officer moves an application for age determination by ossification test, the Court should give an opportunity of hearing to the accused also. The age determination test conducted on the order of the Court shall be completed within fifteen days from the date of such order. As per Sec. 94 (3) Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection) Act, 2015 the age recorded, after following the aforesaid procedure, shall be deemed to be the true age of that person.
A question which comes to a logical mind is why the legislature has given priority to school record? It is obvious that the older the documents the remote are the chances of their manipulation. At the time of registration of the child in school, no one could have preconceived that the child may commit some crime in future. Whilst the other documents like driving license, election card etc. which are applied or made on attaining the age of 18 years, there may be chances of afterthought introduction of false age to claim the benefit of age reduction in different walks of life.
