Supreme Court favours guidelines on preliminary assessment on juvenile for trial as adult for heinous offences

The Supreme Court on Wednesday asked the Centre, the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights and others to consider passing appropriate guidelines on "preliminary assessment", mandatory to decide if a juvenile between 16 and 18 years of age should be tried as an adult for committing a heinous offence.

"The world acknowledges that children in conflict with law should be treated differently than adults. The reason is that the mind of the child has not attained maturity and it is still developing. Therefore, the child should be tested on different parameters and should be given an opportunity of being brought into the mainstream," the top court said.

The Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 mandates that where a child in conflict with law has committed a heinous offence and is above the age of 16 years, the Juvenile Justice Board and Children's Court would make a preliminary assessment and pass appropriate orders.

Making "preliminary assessment is a delicate task with requirement of expertise and has its own implications as regards trial of the case. Thus, it appears expedient that appropriate and specific guidelines in this regard are put in place," a bench of Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Vikram Nath said.

The court also pointed out the 2015 Act or the Model Rules do not lay down any guidelines or framework to facilitate the Board in making a proper preliminary assessment on the relevant aspects. The only liberty given to the Board is to obtain assistance of an experienced psychologist or a psychosocial worker or other expert.

"The report of the preliminary assessment decides the germane question of transferring the case of a child between 16 to 18 years of age to the Children’s Court. This evaluation of ‘mental capacity and ability to understand the consequences’ of the child in conflict with law can, in no way, be relegated to the status of a perfunctory and a routine task. The process of taking a decision on which the fate of the child in conflict with law precariously rests, should not be taken without conducting a meticulous psychological evaluation," the bench said.

The top court dismissed an appeal filed by the CBI and Barun Kumar Thakur against the Punjab and Haryana High Court's 2018 judgement which set aside a decision to try a class XI student of a reputed school in Gurugram as an adult for killing a class II student on September 8, 2017.

The bench said it has no hesitation in agreeing with the ultimate result of the High Court in remanding the matter for a fresh consideration after rectifying the errors on lack of adequate opportunity to the child in conflict with law.

The High Court had directed to consider afresh and assess the intelligence, maturity, physical fitness and as to how the child in conflict with law was in a position to know the consequences of the offence.