Allahabad HC Shields Juvenile From Adult Trial, Flags Dangers Of Digital Age

Last Updated:July 27, 2025, 02:28 IST

The 16-year-old boy was accused of rape and causing abortion

A consensual physical relationship developed between the juvenile and a 14-year-old girl, which led to pregnancy. When the girl was five months pregnant, it was alleged that the boy, with the help of two adults, gave her medicine that caused a miscarriage. File pic

“The good-old-days icon of a truant child seems to get replaced by the modern-day mascot of a violent predator," the Allahabad High Court observed, as it intervened to stop the adult prosecution of a 16-year-old boy accused of rape and causing abortion.

Quoting with approval from the Bombay High Court’s observations on the psychological fallout of unregulated digital exposure, the court noted that “television, internet and social media have let the children, especially the adolescents, leapfrog into the adult world… Mostly it is a crash-landing, with disastrous consequences."

The remarks came as Justice Siddharth allowed a criminal revision filed by a minor, referred to as Juvenile X, against orders of the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) and a special POCSO court in Kaushambi that had directed he be tried as an adult for a “heinous offence".

A consensual physical relationship developed between the juvenile and a 14-year-old girl, which led to pregnancy. When the girl was five months pregnant, it was alleged that the boy, with the help of two adults, gave her medicine that caused a miscarriage. He was booked under POCSO, and the JJB conducted a preliminary assessment under Section 15 of the Juvenile Justice Act, concluding he should face an adult trial.

However, the High Court found that the process adopted by the Board and the POCSO court was not in conformity with the law.

The boy had undergone a psychological evaluation that revealed a mental age of six years and an IQ of 66, indicative of mild intellectual disability. He struggled with academic performance, had poor social interaction, and scored in the borderline to mild clinical range on behavioural tests. Despite these findings, the JJB dismissed the report and based its decision largely on the allegations and the statement of the victim.

“This Court finds that the report of psychologist was in favour of the revisionist… the revisionist with score of 62 comes in borderline category which is even below the category of low/below average," the court said, adding that “he was not capable nor he took decision to administer the victim medicine alone".

Justice Siddharth observed that “an order under Section 15… not only gives a different legal character to a juvenile… but also takes away the application of the beneficial provisions" under juvenile law. The court stressed that such an order must be the result of “a crucial judicial examination", and not a routine endorsement of FIR content or assumptions about intent.

Criticising what it described as a “mechanical" application of Section 15, the court said, “Retributive approach vis-à-vis juveniles needs to be shunned unless there are exceptional circumstances… Let no child be condemned unless his fate is foreordained by his own destructive conduct".

The orders of the JJB and POCSO court were set aside, and the High Court directed that the boy be tried as a juvenile under the special procedure laid down in the Juvenile Justice Act.

Salil Tiwari

Salil Tiwari, Senior Special Correspondent at Lawbeat, reports on the Allahabad High Court and courts in Uttar Pradesh, however, she also writes on important cases of national importance and public interests fr...Read More

Salil Tiwari, Senior Special Correspondent at Lawbeat, reports on the Allahabad High Court and courts in Uttar Pradesh, however, she also writes on important cases of national importance and public interests fr...

Read More

Location :

First Published:

News india Allahabad HC Shields Juvenile From Adult Trial, Flags Dangers Of Digital Age