ASIF SAEED KHAN KHOSA, J.---The petitioner is an injured victim and respondents Nos.1 to 4 are the accused persons in case F.I.R. No,172 registered at Police Station Khurrianwala, District Faisalabad on 1-4-2003 in respect of an offence under section 324, P.P.C. After holding a full-dressed trial of the said case the learned Magistrate Section 30, Jaranwala, District Faisalabad convicted and sentenced respondents Nos.1 to 4 for various offences. _The said respondents,A preferred an appeal in that regard and vide judgment dated 9-9-2006 the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jaranwala, District Faisalabad allowed the said appeal and remanded case for holding of a fresh trial of the said respondents while treating respondent No,3 as a 'child' within the purview of the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance, 2000. That judgment has been assailed by the petitioner before -this Court through the present revision petition.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the -parties at some length and have 'gone through the record of this case with their assistance.
3. It is evident from the record of this case that during the trial held by the learned Magistrate respondent No,3 had never urged or claimed that he was a 'child' for the purposes of the provisions of the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance, 2000 and the question of his juvenility had been agitated for the first time before the learned appellate Court.. While rendering the impugned judgment dated 9-9-2006 the learned Additional Sessions Judge had primarily relied upon the age of respondent No,3 mentioned in the Slip Saza and in the statement of respondent No,3 recorded under section 342, Cr.P.C. And had concluded that respondent No,3 was a 'child' at the time of the alleged occurrence and, thus, he could not have been tried by the learned Magistrate jointly with his co- B accused who were all adults and grown up. During the course of hearing of the present revision petition the learned counsel for the petitioner has produced a copy of an extract from the Register of Births maintained at the relevant Union Council to maintain that as a matter of fact respondent No,3 was more than eighteen years of age at the time of the occurrence in issue. As against that the learned counsel for respondents Nos.1 to 4 has placed reliance upon a School Leaving Certificate, the National Identity Card of a sister of respondent No,3, Slip Saza prepared by the local police, the statement of respondent No,3, recorded under section 342, Cr.P.C. And an Identification Certificate prepared by the Investigating Officer to contend that the Birth Certificate being relied upon by the petitioner is factually incorrect and that respondent No,3 was in fact less than eighteen years of age at the time of the occurrence. It has, however, been conceded by the learned counsel for the petitioner as ,well as the learned counsel for respondents Nos.1 to 4 that most of the abovementioned pieces of evidence being relied upon by the parties in respect of the age of respondent No,3 had never been produced or alluded to before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jaranwala, District Faisalabad and that no inquiry under section 7 of the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance, 2000 had been conducted either by the learned trial Court or by the learned appellate Court. Thus, during the hearing of this revision petition a consensus has emerged between the learned counsel for all the parties that the question regarding the age of respondent No,3 at the time of the occurrence in issue needed a proper and thorough probe and that it was quite unsafe to leave the said question to be decided on c the basis of a mere visual assessment of respondent No,3's age by a police officer through the Slip Saza or by the learned trial Court at the time of recording of respondent No,3's statement recorded under section 342, Cr.P.C. They have all, therefore, agreed that the matter may be remanded by this Court to the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jaranwala District Faisalabad for attending to the question of respondent No,3's age in some detail and with reference of -the relevant material available with the parties. In the peculiar circumstances of this case I have found such a consensus emerging between the learned counsel for the parties to be quite proper and in the fitness of things.
4. For what has been discussed above this revision petition is allowed, the impugned judgment passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jaranwala, District Faisalabad on 9-9-2006 is set aside and the matter is remanded to the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jaranwala, District Faisalabad for attending to the question of respondent No,3's age in some detail with reference to all the relevant material available with the parties in that respect and then to re-decide the appeal filed before him by respondents Nos.1 to 4. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jaranwala, District Faisalabad is further directed to consider the advisability or otherwise of getting respondent No,3 medically examined by a Board of Doctors for the purposes of ascertaining his age. In case the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jaranwala, District Faisalabad ultimately concludes that respondent No,3 was indeed less than eighteen years of age at the time of occurrence then he shall examine the matter in the light of the provisions of section 537, Cr.P.C. In order to see whether the said respondent's trial jointly with his co-accused had occasioned any miscarriage of justice so as to remand the case to the learned trial Court for holding a fresh trial or not. The criminal case in hand had originated on 1-4-2003, i.e, more than three years ago. In that backdrop the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jaranwala, District Faisalabad is directed to conclude the post-remand proceedings within the next couple of months.