Gurgaon school murder: Appeal filed against preliminary investigation report
The order is later passed to transfer the case to children’s court for trying juvenile as an adult. He is accused of murder Class 2 student in a school toilet on September 8 morning.gurgaon Updated: Jan 16, 2018 17:58 IST
The father of the 16-year-old apprehended by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on November 7, on charges of murdering a class 2 student of a private school in Gurgaon, has filed an appeal against the preliminary investigation report at the Gurgaon special children’s court and the arguments will be heard on January 22.
The lawyer filed the application on Monday saying that the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) failed to appreciate that the impugned order could not have been passed in the present case until a final report is filed before the board.
As per section 15 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, in every heinous offence allegedly committed by a juvenile who is admittedly above the age of sixteen years, a preliminary assessment is to be conducted by the board.
The order is later passed to transfer the case to children’s court for trying juvenile as an adult. He is accused of murder Class 2 student in a school toilet on September 8 morning.
“In this case the principal magistrate of JJ Board conducted the preliminary assessment in a haste without any application of mind and passed the impugned order and erroneously held that the appellant is liable to be tried as an adult u/s 18(3) of the Act,” said Sandeep Aneja, accused’s counsel.
The lawyer said the section 15 of the Act is very clear to the extent that the “preliminary assessment” is to be conducted with regard to the mental and physical capacity of the juvenile to commit a heinous offence.
The matter is being investigated by the CBI presently and until a final report is filed by the probe agency, there cannot be any “preliminary assessment” by the JJB on the aspect of the ability to understand the “circumstances” in which the juvenile allegedly committed the offence.
“The two reports filed by the legal cum probation officer and senior clinical psychologist played an important role before preparing the preliminary assessment report. We were not even provided the copy of the reports and they could not be relied upon as it clearly amounts to be in violation of fair trial, which is the fundamental tenet of criminal jurisprudence as well as the Act,” said Aneja.
The juvenile’s lawyer had moved an application at the JJB for providing a copy of the reports but the application was dismissed by the principal magistrate.
The Gurgaon special children’s court had extended the stay of the juvenile accused at a Observation home till January 17.