Tripti Devi vs The State Of Bihar on 19 August, 2025

0
9

[ad_1]

. It is further noticed that in the register, the year of

birth has subsequently been cut and altered from 2003 to 2005.

However, such interpolation is not supported by any

contemporaneous record and, therefore, cannot be relied upon.

12. The father of the victim has also consistently

stated the date of birth of the victim as 31.10.2003, which

corroborates the original entry in the school register. In Rishipal

Singh Solanki vs. State of U.P. & Others reported in (2022) 8

SCC 602, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that in

determination of age, the first and foremost reliance should be

placed upon the matriculation or equivalent certificate, and in

absence thereof, the date of birth as recorded in the school first

attended by the child is to be given primacy. It has further been

observed that any manipulation or alteration in school records at

a subsequent stage cannot override the contemporaneous entry
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.1152 of 2024 dt.19-08-2025

made at the time of first admission.

[ad_2]

Source link

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here