The Punjab and Haryana high court on Tuesday refused to grant bail to a Gurugram juvenile accused in the murder case of a student of the same private school where he studied in September 2017.
The boy is accused of slitting the throat of a Class-2 student in a bid to postpone exams. Initially, the probe was conducted by Haryana Police and a bus conductor was accused of murdering the child. Later, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) claimed that it was committed by the juvenile in question. He is in an observation home since November 2017. His bail plea is pending in the HC since November 2018.
The high court bench of Justice Arvind Sangwan observed that the petitioner child is to be treated as an “adult” while deciding bail. Hence, there is ‘little scope’ for the court to invoke provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, which empowers the court to release a juvenile in conflict with law on bail.
The petitioner had sought quashing of October 2018 order of principal magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Gurugram, and November 2018 order of additional sessions judge, Gurugram, vide which bail was denied. It was argued that trial has still not commenced. There are 127 prosecution witnesses cited in the list of witnesses and it will take long time in conclusion of the trial. The boy was not keeping well in observation home, the court was told.
{{/usCountry}}The petitioner had sought quashing of October 2018 order of principal magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Gurugram, and November 2018 order of additional sessions judge, Gurugram, vide which bail was denied. It was argued that trial has still not commenced. There are 127 prosecution witnesses cited in the list of witnesses and it will take long time in conclusion of the trial. The boy was not keeping well in observation home, the court was told.
{{/usCountry}}The CBI, meanwhile, had argued that petitioner is not suffering from any serious illness as opined by a medical board. Further, it was submitted that he belongs to a “very influential” family and the manner in which the state police had conducted the investigation, prior to its transfer to CBI, demonstrates that the family of the petitioner tried to transpose a conductor of the bus as an accused in place of the boy.
The court, while dismissing bail plea, said the boy was not facing health problems as opined by medical board. The court also took note of the prosecution argument that certain witnesses are minors (including the sister of the deceased) and therefore, possibility of tampering the evidence cannot be ruled out.