HC allows teenager booked under POCSO to be tried as adult

MUMBAI: The Bombay high court has allowed a Yavatmal-based man accused of sexually exploiting a 14-year-old girl and helping his friends sexually assault her in 2018 when he was still a minor to be tried as adult.
“He derived sadistic pleasure by exploiting the victim himself as well as throwing the victim in the hands of the others,” the court said while rejecting the accused’s petition challenging the Yavatmal Juvenile Justice Board and sessions court’s decision to try him as an adult. The accused, who was aged 17 years at time of the incidents, demonstrated sufficient mental and physical maturity to comprehend the gravity of his actions, thereby warranting trial in an adult court, the high court noted.
The case arose from incidents reported in 2018, when the 14-year-old girl accused the 17-year-old boy and his accomplices of sexually assaulting her repeatedly. The boy was subsequently booked under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.
Initially, the juvenile justice board ordered that he be tried under juvenile justice provisions. But following an application from the girl’s father, the board conducted a preliminary inquiry which found that the accused had the capacity to understand the nature of his actions, and recommended his trial as an adult. This decision was subsequently affirmed by the additional sessions court in Yavatmal, prompting the accused to file a revision petition before the high court.
The prosecution, represented by advocate AR Chutke, noted that the accused had acted with clear intent and planning. Evidence presented included the accused’s use of sedatives to incapacitate the victim, repeated sexual assaults over several months, and threats to her life to ensure silence. It was also revealed that the accused had involved others in the assaults and threatened to publicly circulate videos of the sexual assaults. The prosecution argued that these actions reflected a high degree of maturity and awareness.
Counsel for the accused, advocate Parvez Mirza, argued that the JJB’s inquiry violated procedural safeguards, including the statutory timeline for conducting assessments. He contended that reports from the psychiatrist and the probation officer were inconclusive and failed to provide concrete evidence of the accused’s ability to comprehend the consequences of his actions.
In the judgment, justice GA Sanap observed that the accused’s actions were calculated and deliberate. He repeatedly assaulted the victim, manipulated her using sedatives, and facilitated further abuse by involving others. Reports from the psychiatrist found him to be stable, oriented, and capable of understanding the consequences of his actions, the court said, highlighting his absence of remorse, which indicated a mature and deliberate state of mind.
The court concluded that the accused’s actions reflected criminal intent and maturity and dismissed the revision petition, emphasising the importance of balancing the rehabilitative goals of juvenile justice with the need for accountability in heinous crimes.