Boy Was Aware Of Consequences: Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds Juvenile Justice Board Order To Try 16 Year Old Boy As An Adult For Rape Of 7 Yr Old Girl

The Himachal Pradesh High Court refused to interfere with the decision of Juvenile Justice Board for referring the matter to children’s court to try a 16 years old boy as an adult for the rape of 7 years old girl.

A revision petition was considered by the High Court challenging the order of lower courts to try a 16 years old boy as an adult for the rape of 7 years old girl.

The Bench of Justice Rakesh Kainthla observed, “He brought her to his house and gave her water, and again raped her. He cleaned her blood and threatened that he would not play with her in case the incident was reported to any person. The conduct of the petitioner of repeatedly raping the victim, cleaning the blood and threatening her not to reveal the incident to any person, showed that the petitioner was aware of the consequences of his act. He wanted to conceal the commission of the act, which is why he had cleaned the blood and threatened the victim. Hence, the findings recorded by the JJB cannot be said to be bad. These findings are sustainable based on the material on record.”

Advocate Harish Sharma represented the Petitioner, while Advocate Ajit Sharma represented the Respondent.

Case Brief

The police presented a challan against the petitioner for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO)Act for the rape of a seven year old girl.

The Petitioner was aged 16 years one month and 23 days at the time of the incident, hence, the charge sheet was filed before the Juvenile Justice Board.

Upon medical examination of the petitioner, it was concluded there was nothing to suggest that the petitioner suffered from any mental or physical incapacity to commit the crime. The nature of the offence suggested that the petitioner knew the consequences of his act. Therefore, the matter was submitted to the Children’s Court for trying the petitioner as an adult.

The appeal filed before the session judge against the order of Juvenile Justice Board was also dismissed as the statement of the victim showed that the petitioner had committed repeated sexual assault upon her and threatened her not to disclose the incident to any person.

Thus, the present revision petition was filed before the Himachal Pradesh High Court.

Court’s Analysis

At the outset, the High Court referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in which it was held that the revisional court does not exercise appellate jurisdiction and it can only rectify the patent defect, errors of jurisdiction or the law.

Further, the Court opined that the period for completion of preliminary assessment under Section 12(3) of POCSO is not mandatory but directory.

“Therefore, in view of the binding precedent of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the time period of three months is directory and not mandatory, and the submission that the proceedings are vitiated due to noncompletion of the inquiry within three months vitiated the inquiry cannot be accepted”, the Court said.

Further, the High Court observed that the conduct of the petitioner of repeatedly raping the victim, cleaning the blood and threatening her not to reveal the incident to any person, showed that the petitioner was aware of the consequences of his act.

Juvenile Justice Board was to determine the mental and physical capacity of the petitioner to commit the crime; therefore, the mere fact that the documents were not forwarded to the Medical Board cannot lead to an inference that the report issued by the Medical Board was bad.

Accordingly, the High Court refused to exercise its revisional jurisdiction.

Cause Title: V (a juvenile) V. State of H.P (Neutral Citation:2025:HHC:24437)

Click here to read/download Judgment