A Juvenile Justice Board in Assam’s Hailakandi district has ordered that a 17-year-old accused in the alleged rape and murder of a 16-year-old girl face trial as an adult. The order comes more than two months after the girl was found dead at her home in the Aloichora area on the night of August 1.
Police said the accused was 17 years and five months old at the time of the incident. He was detained during the first week of August as investigators pursued the case.
He was detained during the first week of August as investigators pursued the case. Relevant provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act were also invoked. Police said the accused was 17 years and five months old at the time of the incident. A case was registered under provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, including Section 65(1), relating to rape of a girl under 16, and Section 103(1), relating to murder.
A Special Investigation Team (SIT) was constituted to investigate the case. Police subsequently filed a chargesheet against five accused in September, including the juvenile, after examining forensic and medico-legal evidence, witness accounts, digital records and materials recovered from the scene. The Children’s Court determines whether the matter should proceed as an adult trial. Meanwhile, the Hailakandi board’s decision has prompted differing views among legal practitioners. Laskar argued that the juvenile justice framework provides for stringent consequences while retaining special protections for children.
Under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, children aged 16 to 18 accused of heinous offences can undergo a preliminary assessment to determine their capacity to understand the consequences of the alleged offence and the circumstances in which it was committed. others have questioned whether an adult trial is appropriate for an accused who was below 18 at the time While some have welcomed the move in view of the gravity of the allegations.
She said the decision could be challenged before a higher court and stressed that the seriousness of an allegation must not override statutory safeguards.
