HC sends juvenile case for fresh assessment

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has made it clear that a child in conflict with the law having the mental capacity to commit an offence will not necessarily mean that he fully understands the consequences of his actions.

Advertisement

The ruling came in a case where the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Chandigarh, concluded that a child was mature enough to face trial for unnatural offence under Section 377 of the IPC as an adult before transferring his trial to children’s court having jurisdiction to try such matters.

Quotes Nida Fazli

Justice Kuldeep Tiwari quotes poet Nida Fazli to emphasise protection of children. “Jin Charaaghon Ko Hawaon Ka Koi Khauf Nahi Un Charaaghon Ko Hawaon Se Bachaya Jaye (Those lamps that are not fearful of strong winds, they must be protected from the winds. Let’s do that),” the court observes.

The decision was based on the assumption that the child possessed the mental capacity to commit the offence.

Justice Kuldeep Tiwari took note of the fact that the child was booked in January last year under Section 377 and the provisions of the POCSO Act after a case was registered at Sector 49 police station following allegations of “anal sex” with the complainant’s son.

Justice Tiwari asserted the board could not have disregarded findings in social investigation report explicitly stating that the child lacked awareness about the consequences of his actions. The report should, rather, have been given “equal importance” before deciding whether the child should be tried as an adult.

Referring to a Supreme Court’s judgment, Justice Tiwari asserted mental capacity to commit an offence would not automatically imply an understanding of its consequences.

The probation officer’s report, in the case before the court, clearly stated that the petitioner lacked the capacity to comprehend the repercussions of the alleged offence. As such, the board should have applied Section 18(1) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, which prioritised the child’s rehabilitation and reintegration into society.

“At this stage, this court is reminded of a verse, befitting the case at hand, by a renowned poet Nida Fazli. ‘Jin Charaaghon Ko Hawaon Ka Koi Khauf Nahi Un Charaaghon Ko Hawaon Se

continued on Bachaya Jaye’ (Those lamps that are not fearful of strong winds, they must be protected from the winds. Let’s do that). Therefore, the issue as to whether the child had the ability to understand the consequences of the offence also requires reconsideration,” Justice Tiwari asserted.

The court added the board failed to consider critical findings in the report, which said the child was a victim of parental neglect with a strong attachment to his mother, who lived away in her native village, while his father failed to provide adequate care.

The report also referred to the child’s introverted nature, marked by self-judgment, inward focus, and a preference for isolation over group activities. These observations, the court noted, were crucial factors for determining the child’s mental and emotional state.

Justice Tiwari remanded the matter to the board for a fresh preliminary assessment, with clear directions to strictly adhere to the legal principles outlined by the court and complete the process within the timeframe prescribed under the relevant Central Government guidelines.