Board’s move to try accused as adult in violation of law: HC

CHANDIGARH: The Punjab and Haryana high court has held that the decision of Gurgaon Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) on trial of the accused minor as an adult in the murder case of a eight-year-old school boy was in violation of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.

In the detailed order released on Monday, the court has directed the Gurgaon JJB to decide afresh within six weeks after assessing the intelligence, maturity, physical fitness to ascertain whether the accused boy knew of consequences and then form an opinion whether the juvenile accused can be tried as an adult. The order was passed on October 11.

The high court bench of justice Daya Chaudhary found that no list of witnesses and documents were supplied to the accused boy or his parents which shows that the JJB decided the case “contrary to the provisions of the Act”.

“It cannot be interpreted that a delinquent child would not get a fair hearing, whereas, it is the requirement of Section 8(3) of the Act that the participation of the child and the parent or guardian is to be at every step of the process. “Section 3 especially states that a positive interpretation has to be given to ensure that an environment is created so that the child should feel comfortable. The confidentiality is required with regard to third party just to protect the interest of the child,” said the court on the CBI’s argument that reports were not provided due to confidentiality and it was not necessary to provide the list of witnesses at this stage to the accused.

The court was hearing appeal of the accused boy in the case of Class-2 boy murdered on September 8, 2017, at the school campus in Gurgaon. In December 2017, the JJB had held that teenager can be tried as an adult and the petitioner boy had approached the court in July 2018.

BOARD ASSESSMENT BASED ON WRONG TESTS

The court also found that the board’s assessment was based on inappropriate tests. The cross-examination of psychologist regarding the same was not allowed, the court said.

The petitioner was 16 years 9 months, when these tests to assess the mental capacity were conducted on him, which were not correct tests and have resulted in wrong results, the court said adding that the tests conducted on him were meant for the age group between 5 and 15 years.