February 15, 2019:
Delhi Court has dismissed the petition of a youth seeking trial as a juvenile in a case in which he had allegedly run over a person with his father’s Mercedes in 2016 while he was a teenager.
The accused, through his counsels, Senior Advocate Ramesh Gupta & Rajeev Mohan, had challenged an order of Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) holding that he should be tried as an adult.
The counsels submitted before the Appellate Court of additional sessions Judge Prashant Kumar that it was not a heinous crime and, therefore, the trial should took place under Juvenile Justice Act.
Public prosecutor Atul Srivastava, however, submitted that the crime was heinous in nature.
JJB in June 2016 had called the alleged offence “heinous”.
It said in its order that the accused was in no manner lacking the mental and physical capacity to commit the alleged offence and had the ability to understand the consequences on the date of the incident.
Police in its charge-sheet said that the accused had fatally run over the victim, Siddharth Sharma, with his father’s Mercedes when Sharma was trying to cross a road near Ludlow Castle School in North Delhi on April 4, 2016.
On May 26, Police had chargesheeted the juvenile in JJB for culpable homicide not amounting to murder, which entails a max. of 10 yrs in jail.
Initially, a case under IPC Section 304A was lodged against him, but later he was booked for culpable homicide and sent to a reform home.
Police had slapped the culpable homicide charge after learning that he was a repeat offender and also arrested his father for abetting the crime.
This is one of the first of its kind cases since the amendment in Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2015, which allows JJB to transfer cases of heinous offences by children to the sessions court.
As per Section 2(33) of the Act, “heinous offences” include offences for which minimum punishment under IPC or any other law for the time being in force is imprisonment for seven years or more.