Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds JJB's Decision To Try 16-Yr-Old As An Adult For Alleged Rape Of 7-Yr-Old Girl

In the alleged rape of a 7 year old girl by a 16 year old boy, the Himachal Pradesh High Court has held that preliminary assessment conducted by the Medical Board in accordance with Section 15 of the Juvenile Justice Care and Protection of Children Act, 2015 found that that the accused had an IQ of 92 and was fully aware of the consequences of his acts as he had threatened the victim and told her to not disclose the incident to anyone.The Court remarked that the petitioner did not suffer from any mental or physical incapacity to commit the crime, and the Juvenile Justice Board was right in referring the matter to the Children's Court to try him as an adult. Justice Rakesh Kainthla remarked that “ the Medical Board was to assess the mental capacity of petitioner, which it had assessed and found the petitioner's IQ to be 92; therefore, the mere fact that the documents were not forwarded to the Medical Board cannot lead to an interference that the report issues by the Medical Board was bad."BackgroundA challan was presented by the police against the accused for committing an offence punishable under Section 376 of the Penal Code, 1860 and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, against the victim, aged 7 years.The victim submitted that she had gone to the house of the petitioner to play with him, and when she returned home, she had pain in her stomach. Upon inquiry, she disclosed that the petitioner took her to a cowshed and raped her. As submitted by the police, the petitioner's age was found to be 16 years, one month and 23 days at the time of the incident. Thereafter, the Juvenile Justice Board carried out a preliminary assessment and referred the case to the Children's Court to try him as an adult. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Sessions Judge, Shimla. However, the Sessions Judge dismissed his appeal. Thereafter, the petitioner filed the petition before the High Court, asserting that the preliminary assessment was not concluded within three months as provided under Section 14(3) of the Juvenile Justice Act and further the documents of the case were also not supplied to the Medical Board. The Court remarked that the Supreme Court in X(Juvenile) v. State of Karnataka, held that the period for completion of preliminary assessment under Section 12(3) is not mandatory but directory. Thus, the Court dismissed the revision petition. Case Name: V (a juvenile) v/s State of H.P. Case No.: Cr. Revision No. 392 of 2025Date of Decision: 28.07.2025For the Petitioner: Mr. Harish Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Ajit Sharma, Deputy Advocate GeneralClick Here To Read/Download Order

Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds JJB's Decision To Try 16-Yr-Old As An Adult For Alleged Rape Of 7-Yr-Old Girl

Mehak Aggarwal

Tags