Can Juvenility Be Claimed Even After Conviction? Supreme Court Says Courts Must Conduct Inquiry When Plea Is Raised

The Supreme Court has reiterated that a claim of juvenility can be raised before any court at any stage, and whenever such a claim is made, the court must conduct an inquiry to determine the person’s age in accordance with the procedure prescribed under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.

A bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta made the observation while dealing with a petition filed by Sunder alias Surendra, who claimed that he was a juvenile at the time of the alleged offence committed on February 7, 1983.

Supreme Court on inquiry into juvenility

The Court emphasized that once a plea of juvenility is raised, the court must hold an inquiry by examining evidence relevant to determining the age of the person.

The judges clarified that the age determination process cannot be decided merely on the basis of an affidavit.

Instead, the court must examine documentary evidence and follow the statutory procedure provided under the Juvenile Justice Act.

The bench noted that the proviso to Section 9(2) of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 specifically provides that a plea of juvenility may be raised before any court and must be recognized at any stage of the proceedings, even after the final disposal of the case.

Claim raised decades after the incident

In the present case, the petitioner raised the plea of juvenility long after the incident and even after the dismissal of his appeal against conviction in a murder case.

The offence in question took place on February 7, 1983.

The petitioner relied on two documents to support his claim.

He produced a scholar register and transfer certificate issued by a school dated February 12, 1983, as well as a birth certificate issued by the Gram Panchayat on April 19, 2024.

Both documents recorded the petitioner’s date of birth as February 1, 1968.

On this basis, the petitioner claimed that he was about 15 years old at the time of the offence, and therefore sought the benefit of the Juvenile Justice Act.

State’s objections

The State of Uttar Pradesh opposed the plea, arguing that the claim of juvenility was being raised for the first time nearly 46 years after the incident.

The State also submitted that determining the authenticity of the documents relied upon by the petitioner would require verification and examination of evidence.

According to the State, such factual issues should normally be examined by the appropriate forum under the Juvenile Justice Act rather than directly by the Supreme Court under its jurisdiction.

The Court referred to its earlier judgment in Rahul Kumar Yadav v State of Bihar (2024), where it held that a plea of juvenility can be raised at any stage of the proceedings.

The bench also relied on the decision in Vinod Katara v State of Uttar Pradesh (2023), where the Court held that whenever a claim of juvenility is raised, the court must conduct an inquiry by receiving necessary evidence rather than deciding the issue based on affidavits.

Court orders inquiry into age

Taking note of the documents produced by the petitioner, the Court observed that they prima facie indicated a date of birth that could bring him within the definition of a juvenile at the time of the offence.

The Court therefore directed that a proper inquiry be conducted to verify the petitioner’s age.

The Sessions Judge, Meerut has been directed to conduct the inquiry himself or assign it to an Additional Sessions Judge in accordance with the procedure under the Juvenile Justice Act.

The Court directed that all parties, including the victim, must be given an opportunity to present evidence during the inquiry.

If required, the petitioner may be brought from jail to participate in the proceedings.

The Supreme Court has directed that the inquiry report be submitted in a sealed cover within three months.

The matter has been listed for further consideration on May 26, 2026.

Case Title: Sunder @ Surendra Vs State of Uttar Pradesh

Bench: Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta

Date of Judgment: February 19, 2026