Case Summary: Mukarrab & Anr. v. State of U.P.
Case Summary: Mukarrab & Anr. v. State of U.P.
Citation: (2016) 11 SC CK 0106; (2017) 2 SCC 210; AIR 2017 SC 1013
Date of Judgment: November 30, 2016
Bench: A.K. Sikri, J.; R. Banumathi, J.
Court: Supreme Court of India (Division Bench)
[Judgment Source] https://www.courtkutchehry.com/Judgement/Search/AdvancedV2?docid=1042587
Background of the Case
This appeal challenged the Allahabad High Court’s decision upholding the conviction and life sentence of the appellants under Section 302/149 IPC and Section 148 IPC. For the first time before the Supreme Court, the appellants raised the claim of juvenility under Section 7A of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000.
Law Points Raised
1. Whether the appellants were juveniles on the date of the offence (22.03.1994) under the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000.
2. What is the proper procedure for age determination under Section 7A and Rule 12 of the JJ Rules.
3. Admissibility and value of medical evidence (ossification test) when documentary proof is unavailable.
Ratio Decidendi
The Court reaffirmed that in the absence of valid documentary evidence, medical opinion can be relied upon. The standard for age determination is not 'beyond reasonable doubt' but based on the degree of probability. The benefit of doubt should go to the accused in borderline cases.
Final Ruling
The Court accepted the medical board’s opinion which indicated that both appellants were between 35–40 years at the time of ossification test in 2016, thus confirming they were not juveniles on the date of the offence in 1994. The appeals were dismissed and convictions upheld.
Relevant Paragraph Numbers
- Juvenility claim raised: 2, 5–7
- Medical test and findings: 7–8
- Legal approach to age determination: 10–13
- Rule 12 and JJ Act discussion: 13–14
- Final decision and dismissal: 14–15