When age of victim is not proved on the basis of school leaving certificate?

A School Leaving Certificate would be admissible in
certain cases to prove the date of birth of a person by virtue of the
provisions of section 35 of the Evidence Act.  A reading of section
35   of   the   Evidence   Act   indicates   that   to   render   a   document
admissible under it, three conditions must be satisfied, the first
being 'that the entry that is relied upon must be one in a public or
other official book register or record; the second being 'that it must
be an entry stating a fact in issue or relevant fact;'  and the third
being 'that it must have been made by a public servant in discharge
of his official duty or any other person in performance of a duty
specially enjoined by law.'  An entry relating to date of birth made
in   a   school   register   would   be   relevant   and   admissible   under

section 35 of the Evidence Act, but, it has been held, that such
entry would not have much evidentiary value to prove the age of
the person in the absence of material on which the age was recorded.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.956 OF 2010
Sandeep Janaji Konde V The State of Maharashtra

­­­
   CORAM :   ABHAY M. THIPSAY, J.
DATED  :    4th AUGUST,  2015
­­­
Citation; 2016 ALLMR(CRI)1433

Print Page

When entry regarding age of a person in school register will not have evidentiary value?

Under Section 35 of the Indian Evidence Act, a register maintained in terms of a statute or by a statutory authority in regular course of business would be a relevant fact. Had such a vital evidence been produced, it would have clinched the issue. The respondent did not choose to do so.

In the aforementioned backdrop the evidences brought on record are required to be considered. The Admission Register or a Transfer Certificate issued by a Primary School do not satisfy the requirements of Section 35 of the Indian Evidence Act. There is no reliable evidence on record to show that the date of birth was recorded in the school register on the basis of the statement of any responsible person.

In Brij Mohan Singh vs. Priya Brat Narain Sinha and others [AIR 1965 SC 282], this Court, inter alia, observed that in actual life it often happens that persons give false age of the boy at the time of his admission to a school so that later in life he would have an advantage when seeking public service for which a minimum age for eligibility is often prescribed.

The entry of date of birth made in school admission register in terms of Section 35 of the Evidence Act should be considered from that perspective.

However, in Birad Mal Singhvi (supra), it was held :

"...To render a document admissible under

Section 35, three conditions must be satisfied, firstly, entry that is relied on must be one in a public or other official book, register or record, secondly, it must be an entry stating a fact in issue or relevant fact, and thirdly, it must be made by a public servant in discharge of his official duty, or any other person in

performance of a duty specially enjoined by law. An entry relating to date of birth made in the school register is relevant and admissible under Section 35 of the Act but the entry regarding to the age of a person in a school register is of not much evidentiary value to prove the age of the person in the absence of material on which the age was recorded..."

In Chittaranjan Das vs. Durgapore Project Limited & Ors. [99 CWN 897], it was held

"Thus, in absence of the primary material

on the basis whereof the age was recorded, and particularly in view of the conflicting evidence available, it is not possible to accept the

contention of Mr. Roy that the date of birth of the petitioner as recorded in the said

certificate would prevail over the letter of the Board."

The said principles were reiterated in Coal India Limited vs. Arun Kumar Sinha & Others [1999 (1) SLR 151].

Supreme Court of India

Sushil Kumar vs Rakesh Kumar on 16 October, 2003

Print Page