The court was hearing the murder case of a Gurgaon student in September 2017.
New Delhi:
Nearly five years after a child was murdered at a private school in Gurugram, the Supreme Court on Wednesday said the juvenile accused in the 2017 case should be probed afresh to determine whether he was charged as an adult. To prosecute or not.
“The fate of a child in conflict with law should not be taken without careful psychological assessment,” the Supreme Court said.
It agreed with the finding of the Punjab and Haryana High Court that further evaluation of the accused should have been done after the psychologist had recommended and also suggested the name of the institution.
A bench of Justice Dinesh Maheshwari and Justice Vikram Nath dismissed the appeal filed by the father of the child challenging the October 11, 2018 order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
The Juvenile Justice Board had said in December 2017 that a juvenile accused of murder would be tried as an adult based on a preliminary assessment of his mental and physical ability.
The board had said that the teenager had sufficient mental and physical capacity to commit the crime. The Supreme Court said that the Juvenile Justice Board and the Children’s Court are of the view that mental capacity and ability to understand the consequences of an offense are the same.
“That is, if the child had the mental capacity to commit a crime, he automatically had the ability to understand the consequences of the crime. In our view, this is a grave error committed by him,” Supreme said. Court said.
The Supreme Court held that the decision-making process, on which the fate of a child who violates the law, depends uncertainly, should not be undertaken without a careful psychological evaluation.
“We have no hesitation in concurring with the final result of the High Court to consider the matter afresh after rectifying the errors on lack of sufficient opportunity,” the Supreme Court said.
Noting that children may be drawn to more immediate gratification and are not able to deeply understand the long-term consequences of their actions, the Supreme Court observed that they are more likely to be influenced by emotion rather than logic.
“Research shows that young people know the risks for themselves. Despite this knowledge, teens have riskier behaviors than adults (such as drug and alcohol use, unsafe sexual activity, dangerous driving, and/or delinquent behavior). Although they consider risks. Cognitively (by weighing the potential risks and rewards of a particular act), their decisions/actions are more influenced by social (eg peer influence) and/or emotional (eg impulsive) tendencies There may be,” the Supreme Court said.
“In addition, a lack of experience as well as a child’s limited ability to deeply understand the long-term consequences of their actions can lead to impulsive/reckless decision-making,” it said.
The high court had set aside the trial court’s order that a 16-year-old student, accused of killing a child a year ago, would be treated as an adult during the trial. The CBI had alleged that Kishor had killed the student on September 8, 2017 to postpone the examination and cancel a scheduled parent-teacher meeting.