Chandigarh: Punjab and Haryana high court has dismissed a petition filed by CBI for transfer of the trial in the 2017 murder of a seven-year-old student in a Gurgaon school, observing that the trial of a child in conflict with law, even if tried as an adult, must be conducted by a children’s court under Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.Justice Manisha Batra held that the CBI court in Panchkula had not been vested with exclusive jurisdiction to try an offence under IPC Section 302 merely because the case had been investigated by the agency. The court also rejected CBI’s alternative plea seeking transfer of the trial to a children’s court in Panchkula, holding that no grounds were made out under Section 407 CrPC.The bench observed, “The trial of respondent No. 2 (then a class XI student), who has been directed to be tried as an adult, is to be held by the Children’s Court having jurisdiction under Section 18(3) read with Section 1(4) of JJ Act. This requirement is a sine qua non (indispensable), and the power of transfer under Section 407 CrPC cannot be used to take the trial to a court of a different character.”The case concerns the murder of a seven-year-old Class-II student — given the imaginary name ‘Prince’ in the court order — in the washroom of a Gurgaon school on Sept 8, 2017. Investigation was transferred to CBI, which arrested a Class XI student, who was not yet 18 at the time of the incident. The Juvenile Justice Board directed that he be tried as an adult.CBI then approached HC, seeking transfer of the trial from the additional sessions judge-cum-children’s court, Gurgaon, to the Special CBI court in Panchkula, contending that it had jurisdiction over CBI cases across Haryana.CBI counsel Prateek Gupta argued that since it was the prosecuting agency as well, trial should be conducted by its special court at Panchkula. Haryana govt counsel AAG Neeraj Poswal said they had no objection to the transfer, and the victim’s father, who is the complainant, supported CBI’s plea.Opposing the petition, counsel for the juvenile, Viraj Gandhi, submitted that Section 18(3) of JJ Act says that trial of a child as an adult can be conducted only by the children’s court. He argued that CBI had filed the chargesheet before the children’s court. Many prosecution witnesses had already been examined and transferring the case at this stage could lead to delays.Rejecting CBI’s contention regarding jurisdiction of its special court, Justice Batra noted that the special judge was appointed for cases involving offences under Prevention of Corruption Act and related offences, and not for trial of every case investigated by CBI. The offence under Section 302 IPC did not fall within its ambit, the court said.JJ Act provides safeguards for children in conflict with law, including consideration of their special needs, a child-friendly atmosphere, an individual care plan and rehabilitation measures.Dismissing the petition, HC directed the Gurgaon children’s court to proceed with the trial and try to conclude it expeditiously, preferably within six months. CBI was directed to ensure the presence of its witnesses on the dates fixed by the trial court, which was allowed to record evidence via video conferencing.
