The court will also hear on August 12 arguments on an appeal filed by the boy, who had turned major four days after the April 4incident, challenging the Juvenile Justice Board's order to try him as an adult.
A Delhi court today fixed August 12 for hearing arguments on framing of charges against a teenager, who allegedly ran over a 32-year-old marketing executive while driving his father’s Mercedes here in April. The court will also hear on August 12 arguments on an appeal filed by the boy, who had turned major four days after the April 4incident, challenging the Juvenile Justice Board’s order to try him as an adult. The prosecutor had earlier argued that as per the amended provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, the sessions court cannot send back the case to the board and if it thinks that the boy should not be tried as an adult, it has to try the case itself by acting as the board’s presiding officer. In the appeal, the boy has claimed that at best he could be booked for alleged offence of causing death by rash and negligent act and it was not a case of culpable homicide not amounting to murder for which he has been charged. It has said the boy’s previous offences are of traffic violation and not related to accidents. So it’s not a ground to convert section 304A of IPC into section 304 of IPC. The JJB had on June 4 ordered that the boy would face trial as an adult while observing that the offence allegedly committed by him was “heinous”.
It is the first of its kind case since the amendment in the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2015 which allowed the Board to transfer cases of heinous offences by children to the sessions court. The police had on May 26 chargesheeted the boy in JJB for culpable homicide not amounting to murder which entails a maximum of 10 years jail. Initially, a case under section 304 A of IPC was lodged but later he was booked for the alleged offence of culpable homicide not amounting to murder and sent to reform home.
Police had said in its charge sheet that the boy had fatally run over victim Siddharth Sharma with his father’s Mercedes when Sharma was trying to cross a road near Ludlow Castle School in north Delhi on April 4. The final report was filed for alleged offences under IPC sections 304 (culpable homicide not amounting to murder), 279 (driving on a public way so rashly or negligently as to endanger human life) and 337 (causing hurt by an act which endangers human life) against him.
The Board had on April 26 granted bail to the youth who sought the relief to appear in entrance examinations.