Kamran Mushtaq vs State S — 2025 MLD 367 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Kamran Mushtaq VS State S. 8---Determination of age of accused person claiming himself to be a minor---Reliance of Court on medical evidence as opposed to document, evidence---Application for production of documentary evidence to declare the petitioner as juvenile was rejected---Validity---Section 8 of Juvenile Justice System Act, 2018, ("Act, 2018") used word "inquiry" to determine the age of person on the basis of birth certificate, educational certificate or any other document, primarily to be made by the police and then by Magistrate before order for further detention---Thus, documents primary or secondary, in support of age of accused, shall not be accepted at the whims of the parties without verification but on the touchstone of admissibility rules contained in the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984---Enactment of S.8 of Act, 2018 required the police to collect material for and against claim of juvenility to save precious time of the Courts so as to avoid unnecessary entangling in summoning of stary records on the applications of the parties, as was the requirement of S. 7 of erstwhile law i.e., Juvenile Justice System Ordinance, 2000---Thus, once the police opinion is made available to the Court with documentary proof or with medical examination report, it becomes easy for it to conduct a prompt inquiry for early determination of age of accused which earlier took months to achieve---Such beneficial provision requires that concerned Court on receiving juvenile-challan shall start inquiry to check the veracity of material through the process of verification while calling reports from concerned public offices or school with authorized persons as witnesses whose testimonies shall be recorded in chief with cross-examination and then the Court shall pass an order---Hence, the age of the accused shall only be accepted on the basis of documents after proper inquiry---If after inquiry into such documents, Court rejects them, then it must direct for medical examination---Every accused who is under the charge of murder is liable to sentence of death if the case stands proved, therefore, to avoid death penalty accused is duty bound to prove his claim of being juvenile on the basis of true documents, and burden of proof lays on him---In the present case as per allegation in FIR, deceased was murdered due to firing by the petitioner in the presence of witnesses---Occurrence took place on 28.05.2023; accused claimed his date of birth as 11.11.2005---Trial Court while summoning record of police, NADRA and school along with witnesses conducted a thorough inquiry and it was found that police had not mentioned the age of accused in police case diary on his arrest and kept it blank and accused also did not raise plea of juvenility throughout investigation---Birth certificate of the petitioner was obtained on the basis of civil suit filed after the occurrence---Earlier Form "B" obtained in year 2019 was not based on any authentic document and school leaving certificate also had volunteer entry of date of birth without any proof---Trial Court had no other choice except to call for a medical examination report as required by S.8 of Act, 2018---Report duly signed by five specialist doctors reflected age of petitioner as 21-22 years, which was above the grace margin of 1-2 years---Trial Court while rejecting documents tendered by the petitioner opted to rely on medical report, thus, had not committed any illegality or irregularity so as to warrant any interference by the High Court---Petition was dismissed accordingly.

Kamran Mushtaq vs State S — 2025 MLD 367 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 MLD