In Brief
Rishipal Singh Solanki's son was killed in an attack allegedly involving Nishant Solanki. Nishant claimed to be a juvenile, and the Juvenile Justice Board accepted this based on his matriculation certificate showing his date of birth as 25 September 2004. The appellant challenged this, citing suspicious identical signatures on admission forms separated by five years and other discrepancies. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the matriculation certificate from the examination board constitutes conclusive proof of age under the Juvenile Justice Act 2015. The absence of any credible contradictory document or counter-evidence from the appellant meant the Board's determination must stand. The Court stressed that minor discrepancies in school documents cannot rebut official examination board records.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.