- Apprentice Lawyer
- Legal Jobs
The petitioner, who was a student of Class 11, has been charged with the killing of a seven-year-old inside the school washroom in 2017.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Tuesday dismissed the bail plea filed by the school student accused in the 2017 Gurugram private school murder case.
The petitioner, who was a student of Class 11, has been charged with the murder of a seven-year-old child inside the school washroom (Master Bholu v. State of Haryana and Anr.)
The Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Gurugram had earlier declined the grant of bail to the accused. Thereafter, the Appellate Court/Additional Sessions Judge, Gurugram also dismissed the appeal moved challenging the Board's decision.
The High Court has now dismissed the revision plea challenging these orders. The revision plea was moved on the ground that these orders denying bail were passed while touching upon the merits of the case.
On Wednesday, Justice Arvind Singh Sangwan passed the order, while noting that the accused school student had to be treated as an adult, in line with Supreme Court orders passed on the issue.
The Supreme Court had, in its orders passed in February 2019 and in April this year, stated that the accused was to be “treated as an adult” for the purpose of deciding on bail.
The High Court, therefore, stated there was little scope for it to ascertain whether bail could be granted under Section 12 (grant of bail to a juvenile-accused) of the Juvenile Justice Act.
The High Court, in dismissing the plea of the accused for bail, relied upon detailed orders that had been passed by the Supreme Court and the Juvenile Justice Board that is overseeing the investigation in the case.
Senior Advocate Rupinder Khosla appearing for the petitioner “Bholu” (the name the accused has been assigned with by the Supreme Court to conceal identity) argued that the petitioner was living in difficult circumstances in the children’s home he was detained in. It was submitted that he was suffering from ill-health. Grievance over the delay in commencing proceedings against the accused on account of pending appeals was also raised.
The High Court, however, quoted two medical reports in countering the claims of the petitioner's ill-health. It further clarified that the delay in commencing with the trial could not be a ground for bail.
Furthermore, the Court noted,
In this backdrop, the Court concluded that there was "no ground to grant the concession of bail" to the accused and dismissed the revision plea.