Supreme Court explains the Mode of age determination of Victim in Rape Cases [Read the Judgment]

Answering with the central question as to the criteria to be adopted and applied to resolve the controversy over the age of a rape victim in the event of a discrepancy in the birth certificate and the school certificate, the Supreme Court of India has held that Rule 12 of the Juvenile Justice that Rule 12 of the Juvenile Justice Rules, 2007, is applicable in determining the age of the victim of rape, and that medial opinion can be relied on only in the absence of the documents prescribed in Rule 12 of the Juvenile Justice Rules. The said judgment and order of the High Court led to the State prefering a Criminal Appeal before the Apex Court, contending that the High Court gave undue importance to the difference of two days in the date of birth of the prosecutrix as per the birth certificate and the certificate of the Middle School Examination 2001, and erroneously held that this difference is sufficient to disbelieve the age of the prosecutrix. Rule 12 reads as under: “Rule 12: In every case concerning a child or juvenile in conflict with law, the age determination inquiry shall be conducted by the court or the Board or, as the case may be, the Committee by seeking evidence by obtaining – the matriculation or equivalent certificates, if available; and in the absence whereof; the date of birth certificate from the school first attended; and in the absence whereof; the birth certificate given by a corporation or a municipal authority or a panchayat; and only in the absence of either, or of clause above, the medical opinion will be sought from a duly constituted Medical Board, which will declare the age of the juvenile or child. In case exact assessment of the age cannot be done, the Court or the Board or, as the case may be, the Committee, for the reasons to be recorded by them, may, if considered necessary, give benefit to the child or juvenile by considering his/her age on lower side within the margin of one year, and, while passing orders in such case shall, after taking into consideration such evidence as may be available, or the medical opinion, as the case may be, record a finding in respect of his age and either of the evidence specified in any of the clauses,, or in the absence whereof, clause shall be the conclusive proof of the age as regards such child or the juvenile in conflict with law.” The SC Court had further held in paragraph 12 of Mahadeo S/o Kerba Maske as under: “Under rule 12, it is specifically provided that only in the absence of alternative methods described under Rule 12 to, the medical opinion can be sought for. 3962, wherein the High Court of Madhya Pradesh said that where the doctor having examined the prosecutrix and found her to be below 18½ years, then keeping in mind the variation of two years, the accused should be given the benefit of doubt.Thereafter, the Trial Court rightly held that in the present case the ossification test is not the sole criteria for determination of the date of birth of the prosecutrix as her certificate of birth and also the certificate of her medical examination had been enclosed. "