Gurugram murder accused to be tried as an adult

The 21-year-old man accused of murdering a seven-year-old boy at a private school in Gurugram in 2017 will be tried as an adult, the Juvenile Justice Board ruled on Monday. He was 16 at the time of the murder.

The 21-year-old man accused of murdering a seven-year-old boy at a private school in Gurugram in 2017 will be tried as an adult, the Juvenile Justice Board ruled on Monday. The accused was 16 at the time of the murder.

The accused was 16 at the time of the murder (File Photo/PTI)

Delivering the verdict, principal magistrate Jetin Gujral said the offence was “heinous” in nature. The board held that the circumstances of the murder show that the accused was “mature enough” to understand the consequences and to think of ways to escape punishment.

The case has been transferred to the sessions court and the accused will be produced before it on October 31, a member of the board said.

He could still get relief from the sessions court which, under the Juvenile Justice Act, can review the decision to try the offender as an adult, the board member said.

A Class 2 student of a prominent school in Gurugram’s Bhondsi was found dead inside the school washroom on September 8, 2017. Haryana Police, which initially investigated the murder, arrested the conductor of a school bus the same day, and said that he had confessed to the crime.

However, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), which took over the case on November 6, apprehended the accused, who was studying in Class 11 of the same school, on November 7.

In December 2017, the JJB decided to treat the accused as an adult. The Punjab and Haryana high court, in October 2018 directed the board to make a fresh assessment. Both, the victim’s father and CBI, moved the Supreme Court on October 30, 2018 against the high court order, saying that the high court’s move was wrong and illegal, and that it should have not upset the concrete findings of the previous two courts.

In November 2018, the apex court ordered a status quo in the case. The accused has been in an observation home since his arrest by CBI.

Dismissing the petitions on July 13 this year, the Supreme Court said that while considering a person an adult, one should look at their physical maturity, cognitive abilities, and social and emotional competencies.

A bench of justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Vikram Nath had suggested the Union government and the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) undertake an exercise for uniform guidelines for preliminary assessment of the mental and physical capacity of a juvenile to determine the nature of trial the delinquent should face.

It also rejected the view that if they have the mental capacity to commit the offence, they would also have the capacity to understand the consequences of the offence.

Following the top court order, the JJB on July 27 constituted a team of psychiatrists from Pandit Bhagwat Dayal Sharma Post Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences (PGIMS), Rohtak, to assess the mental state of the accused at the time of the murder.

According to Section 15 of The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, if a child of 16 years of age or above commits a heinous offence — a crime for which the minimum punishment is seven years imprisonment — the JJB is required to “conduct a preliminary assessment with regard to his mental and physical capacity to commit such offence, ability to understand the consequences of the offence and the circumstances in which he allegedly committed the offence” before taking a decision whether the child needs to be tried as an adult.

Prior to the 2015 amendment in the JJ Act, all children below the age of 18 years were treated as juveniles. The JJB is composed of a judicial officer and two social workers.

The report submitted by the experts on October 1 said that “there is no valid test or examination that can retrospectively determine the medical capacity, maturity and ability of the accused”.

At present, there is no evidence of physical or mental illness, or intellectual impairment in the accused, the report said, adding that he has sufficient maturity and ability to understand the consequences of the offence.

Dr Joginder Singh Kairo, senior clinical psychologist and a board member, said the accused was admitted to the psychiatry department of PGIMS Rohtak on September 22 for a detailed assessment over two days. “During his stay there, he was observed and assessed, including a detailed psychological profiling and serial mental status examination. No active psychopathology was found at present,” he said.

“There have been a number of inconsistencies in the documented information and current interviews, so no valid conclusions can be drawn. There is no valid test or examination with reasonable scientific certainty that can retrospectively determine the medical capacity, maturity and ability to understand the consequences of the offence at the time of the commission of the offence as required by the court,” stated the report.

The board members include probation officer Nisha Saini, board member and empaneled psychologist Chavvi Chaudhary.

“Several lapses including lack of consistency, poor connectedness and poor corroborative are present in the information that makes information less reliable and inadequate so any conclusion may not be stated with scientific certainty,” stated the report.

The board also heard the arguments by CBI on October 3, the victim’s counsel on October 4, and the counsel of the accused on October 10 before reserving its order for October 12. The verdict was announced on Monday.

The agency, in a charge sheet, alleged that the accused had murdered the child in a bid to get the examinations postponed and a scheduled parent-teacher meeting cancelled.

Referring to the expert panel report in its order, the JJB said it indicated the accused “has a mature mind although he has immature problem-solving skills. The accused had an IQ (intelligence quotient) of 92, which falls in the category of average intelligence and zero intellectual impairment”.

The JJB also observed that the accused confessed to the murder, and later retracted his statement saying it was given under duress, people familiar with the matter said.

CBI prosecutor Amit Jindal said that the JJB took the charge sheet into consideration while delivering its verdict.

“Based on the PGIMS expert panel report, the JJB committee also talked to the accused. After this the three parties presented their arguments before the JJB. On the basis of the arguments, the JJB ordered that he will be tried as an adult. All three parties have been informed of this order. Suspect will now be produced in the court of district and sessions judge on October 31,” Jindal said.

The family of the accused expressed disappointment on Monday, but refused further comment. The counsel for the accused, Vishal Gupta, said they would challenge the JJB order in the sessions court.

Arguing for the 21-year-old, Gupta on October 4 told the JJB that the main purpose of Juvenile Justice Act is to ensure a juvenile’s welfare. The accused turned 21 on April 3 this year.

The victim’s father said that they will fight “until he (the accused) is proven guilty.”

“This was a long-drawn battle to win; we are hopeful that justice will prevail and the suspect will be tried as an adult by the sessions court. Our prayers will not go unanswered and we will fight until he is proven guilty,” he said.

Welcoming the order, victim’s counsel Sushil Tekriwal said, “JJB has rightly and legally held that the juvenile in conflict with law in the present case had not only committed a heinous offence in a most barbaric way but also has concluded that he had mental and physical capacity to commit such offence, ability to understand the consequences of the offence and the circumstances in which he committed the crime and hence he shall be tried as an adult.”