Section 7 Defendant's Birth Defendant's Birth Certificate and Medical Evidence Scope Defendant, claiming to be a minor offender, relied on the medical report, but the complainant did not present the trial court's birth certificate, depending on the birth certificate Because the child's legal status was not a medical report. The sole measure for determining the age of the accused was one of those pieces of evidence that could be relied upon for the purpose of the medical report to be considered, if any other substantiating evidence on the record relating to the age of the accused. If not present, the complainant was able to obtain a certified copy. The accused's birth certificate, according to which he was born on 28 6 1993 and his birth the next day, 29 199 1993, was registered by the watchman berth certificate in which the accused was referred to the so-called trial court, Such evidence was in it. Position of the exact date of birth of the accused so as to determine the age of the accused and accordingly relied on the birth certificate at the time of occurrence, the accused was 18 years, 2 months and 26 days, Therefore, he did not come to appreciate the child and could not claim a separate trial under the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance 2000 when there was nothing. The trial court had no reason to exclude such an authentic piece of evidence in the record on the birth certificate, according to the medical report. The exact age of any person could not be ascertained and determined when the dental surgeon And the difference between the ossication test report was when the correct birth date was on the birth certificate.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2014
