LAHORE - A Full Bench of the Supreme Court, headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry observed during the hearing of a case here Friday that a trial court is bound under the law to properly judge age of an accused person at the time of recording his statement under section 342 Cr PC even if that is not put an issue at that time by the defence side. The CJP observed the age of an accused person becomes an admissible evidence at that stage if the same is not disputed by the other party. And any benefit of doubt thereto would go to the accused person, he added. The bench also comprising Justice Raja Fayyaz Ahmad and Justice Ch Ijaz Ahmad was hearing appeal of one Muhammad Idrees who was awarded death sentence by the trial court, Khanewal on the charges of murdering one Ahmad Buksh on March 5, 1998. The appellant through Sheikh Khizar Hayat advocate told the court that following an altercation, the victim party had come to the house of the accused with ill-will and the appellant stabbed Ahmad to death out of provocation when in the presence of his (accused) five sisters and parents the victim party allegedly hurled abuses and attacked them. The court was pointed out that at the time the trial court recorded statement of the accused under section 342, the age of the accused was recorded 21/22 years which accounted for his age below 18 (minor) at the time occurrence took place. The counsel further pointed out that during the occurrence, the accused had also sustained injuries which the trial court did not take notice of it until he had moved the high court to also put this fact on the record. The counsel vehemently contested for the relief on the ground, the accused was juvenile at the time of occurrence therefore death could not be awarded to him. Though the point of juvenile was not raised by the defence at the time of trial, the court however was fortified by certain judgements of the Superior Court relating to the application of juvenile law to the occurrences prior to period this law was passed in the year 2000 and also that the court was required to determine the age of the accused before passing the conviction. Allowing benefit of the doubt to the accused the Bench converted the death sentence to life term, retaining rest of the part of the conviction.