Chandigarh tennis academy 'molestation': 2 accused challenge order declaring them adults before High court

Two accused in the molestation case of Chandigarh Lawn Tennis Association (CLTA) have challenged the four-year-old order of Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Chandigarh, that declared them adults before the Punjab and Haryana High Court.

Meanwhile, Justice Shalini Singh Nagpal, while issuing notices to the UT Chandigarh for July 15 has stayed the passing of final order by the Trial Court.

Five trainees of the Chandigarh Academy of Rural Tennis (CHART) that runs under the aegis of Chandigarh Lawn Tennis Association (CLTA) were been booked for sexually harassing and stalking a fellow female trainee. The case was registered on August 17, 2019, on the complaint that the five male trainees misbehaved with her and harassed her at the CLTA complex in Sector 10, Chandigarh.

The five were booked under Sections 354 (sexual harassment), 354A (making sexually coloured remarks), 354D (stalking) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code besides under Section 10 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012 at the Sector 3 police station.

In the complaint, the girl’s father alleged that the five trainees tried to outrage the modesty of his 15-year-old daughter and had been sexually harassing and stalking her at the CLTA for three months. He said that his daughter joined the CLTA in March 2019 and the boys started stalking her and passing lewd remarks since then. He alleged that even when the girl tried to stay away from them, the boys continued the harassment.

Aman Pal, senior advocate, along with advocates Bharat Bhandari and Vinay Yadav, submitted that the petitioners along with three others were facing trial in an FIR dated August 17, 2019. During the trial, an application was moved by the complainant for correct assessment of age of the accused. Thereon, the Juvenile Justice Board initiated proceedings under Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015. Other three accused were declared juveniles in conflict with law. The inquiry against them concluded and they were acquitted of the accusation. Both the petitioners inter alia relied upon matriculate certificates, wherein their date of birth was recorded as December 3, 2002, and April 15, 2004, respectively.

The prosecution, on the other hand, relied upon the extract of the register of primary school of both petitioners which were verified by the police and on that basis, the petitioners were declared adults by the Juvenile Justice Board. In appeal, the order of Juvenile Justice Board was also affirmed by session court on December 6, 2022.

They argued that both orders were violative of Section 94(2) of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, in as much as no “evidence” was led before the Juvenile Justice Board nor the primary school certificates relied upon were ever proved as per law, by examining the concerned official or Principal of school.

After hearing of the arguments, the High Court adjourned the hearing for July 15, 2026. The High Court in the order further says in the meanwhile, the passing of final order by the Trial Court shall remain stayed.