Judges: Justice Sanjay Karol & Justice Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh
The Supreme Court allowed the State's appeal and set aside the Allahabad High Court's directions that mandated medical age determination of victims in all POCSO cases at the bail stage. The Court held that the High Court exceeded its jurisdiction under Section 439 CrPC by issuing such directives. Age determination of a victim is a matter for trial, not bail, and must follow the hierarchy of documents under Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice Act. Medical tests are only permissible when other documentary evidence is unavailable. The Court emphasized that bail courts cannot conduct mini-trials or entertain challenges to the veracity of age-related documents.
High Court exceeded jurisdiction under Section 439 CrPC by issuing directions on medical age tests for all POCSO cases.
Section 94 of Juvenile Justice Act provides clear hierarchy: school certificates first, medical tests only as last resort.
Bail courts cannot conduct detailed examination of evidence or challenge veracity of age documents.
Age determination is a matter for trial courts, not bail courts. Presumption under Section 94 can only be rebutted at trial.
Bail jurisdiction is limited to deciding release pending trial. Courts cannot issue general directions or mandate investigative procedures beyond the specific case.
The legislative intent in Section 94 JJ Act is clear: documentary evidence takes precedence over medical opinion. Courts cannot create alternative procedures.
High Court's constitutional status doesn't expand its statutory powers under CrPC. Each power must be exercised within its defined scope.
The presumption of correctness attached to age documents under Section 94 can only be rebutted during trial through proper evidence, not at bail stage.
FIR No. 622/2022 registered at PS Kotwali, Orai, District Jalaun under Sections 363, 366 IPC and Sections 7, 8 POCSO Act.
Trial Court rejects bail application of accused Anurudh.
Allahabad High Court directs CMO Jalaun to constitute medical board for age determination.
High Court grants interim bail noting inconsistencies in age evidence.
High Court confirms bail and issues directions mandating medical age tests in all POCSO cases.
Supreme Court sets aside High Court directions, clarifies proper procedure for age determination.
You cannot demand medical age test as a right at bail stage. Age challenges must be raised during trial with proper evidence.
Follow hierarchy under Section 94 JJ Act. Collect school/birth certificates first. Medical tests only when documents genuinely unavailable.
Examine age documents for prima facie view only. Do not conduct mini-trials or order medical tests routinely. Refer detailed examination to trial court.
Preserve all age-related documents (school records, birth certificates). These will be crucial evidence. Medical tests are supplementary, not primary.
⚠️ DISCLAIMER: This content is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified legal professional for specific legal guidance. The information provided is based on judicial interpretation and may be subject to changes in law.