Image Source: hindustantimes.com
In a recent development, the Bombay High Court ruled that the Juvenile Justice Board’s (JJB) decision to keep the accused juvenile, involved in the Pune Porsche crash, under custody was found to be invalid and improper. This decision led to the immediate setting free of the young man from the facility.
The crash occurred in Kalyani Nagar, Pune, involving a Porsche, reportedly driven by a 17-year-old boy who was reportedly drunk, causing the unfortunate death of two software developers on May 19.
“The court allows the application for the young man’s release. It shall be under the guardianship of the petitioner (paternal aunt) for the Child in Conflict with Law (CCL) situation,” the court’s panel stated, highlighting the flaws in the JJB’s management of the case.
At first, the JJB had granted bail to the boy on the condition he write a 300-word essay, which caused public backlash. Following a police request highlighting strong video evidence showing the minor drinking at a bar before the crash, the JJB returned him to an observation home. There are plans to try the young man as an adult due to the seriousness of the incident.
Police commissioner Amitesh Kumar confirmed the existence of the surveillance footage, pointing out the young man’s knowledge of his actions. Legal actions were taken against the boy, his father, Vishal Agarwal, for the endangerment of a minor, and the owners and workers of the two bars for dispensing alcohol to a minor.
In response to the public’s concern and to ensure the fair process, the Bombay High Court stressed the need to take into account the youth’s age and the specific rules for handling minors in conflict with the law. “Child in Conflict with Law (CCL) cases should be treated differently,” the court’s decision underscored the principles of juvenile justice.
The court noted that the young man is currently receiving rehabilitation from a psychologist, an effort aimed at his reintegration into society and his well-being. This rehabilitative strategy is consistent with the court’s goal to maintain accountability while considering the youth’s age and circumstances.
This decision came in light of a petition by the boy’s maternal aunt, arguing against his unlawful detention and demanding his immediate release. The case highlights the intricate nature of juvenile justice and the importance of following legal procedures in dealing with matters of such sensitivity.
