Pune Porsche crash case: How drunk teen escaped trial as adult
Special Public Prosecutor Shishir Hiray argued that the circumstances of the case went beyond just reckless driving. "In this case, the boy was allowed to drink and drive. After the crash, there was an attempt to manipulate the judicial process by swapping blood samples. The integrity of the system was shaken," Hiray told the board.The prosecution claimed that after the fatal crash, the boy's blood samples were collected at Sassoon Hospital but the police suspected tampering. A second sample was collected at Aundh Government Hospital as a safeguard. However, the accused, including the boy's parents, allegedly tried to get that sample swapped too but the doctors refused to cooperate.DEFENCE CITED TOP COURT RULINGDefence counsel Prashant Patil countered that the Supreme Court's Shilpa Mittal vs State judgment makes clear that only crimes with a minimum punishment of seven years can be labelled 'heinous'."We had cited a Supreme Court judgement - Shilpa Mittal Vs State in which the SC has defined what constitutes a heinous crime. The guidelines decided by the Supreme Court are binding on everyone. However, the plea by the prosecution is contrary to the apex court's judgement. We demanded that since the plea is contrary to the SC guidelines, it is not maintainable," Patil said.The counsel also said that to define a certain crime as heinous, the prosecution must have a section (invoked in the case) in which the minimum punishment is seven years."In the present case, there is not a single section which has a minimum punishment of seven years. So, we argued that the prosecution's plea is not maintainable," he said.WHAT JUVENILE BOARD SAID?After hearing both sides for nearly two months, the Board sided with the defence and concluded that the criteria for trying the teen as an adult had not been met."In view of the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Shilpa Mittal's case, considering the age and nature of the alleged offences, it being serious offences, the child should not be subjected to preliminary assessment under Section 15 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. The provision of preliminary assessment is only for heinous offences," the board ruled.advertisement"Despite the settled position of law, these applications are moved. Under such circumstances, Preliminary Assessment is not done and the Board is left with no option but to reject the said applications," it added.JJB'S FILMSY PUNISHMENTThe teen was initially granted bail by the Juvenile Justice Court within hours of the fatal crash — on lenient terms that included writing a 300-word essay on road safety — triggering public outrage. He was later sent to an observation home, but the Bombay High Court ruled the remand illegal and ordered his release, insisting the juvenile law be fully upheld.Meanwhile, a sessions court is still hearing arguments to frame charges against ten other accused, including the teen's parents. Currently, the boy's mother is currently out on bail while the other accused, incuding his father, remain in jail.- EndsMust Watch
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
23 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Following backlash, premier Odisha university withdraws order imposing restrictions on women staff and students
Cuttack's premier Ravenshaw University has withdrawn its order asking women faculty, staff and students not to stay on campus past 5.30 pm in the face of backlash. The order, issued by the registrar of the 157-year-old storied institution but withdrawn hours later, said: 'No female faculty, staff and students are permitted to remain in the workplace or on campus after 5.30 pm. This decision will remain in place until a formal Standard Operating Procedure (SoP) is issued, which will outline the necessary guidelines and protocols for work hours and safety measures'. It was withdrawn through a separate order. According to sources, university authorities may have been prompted to take the step in the wake of a student's suicide following alleged sexual harassment at a college in Odisha. 'However, the higher education department interfered saying that such an order would send the wrong message,' one official said. When contacted, the university's registrar refused to comment, saying only that the order stood withdrawn. Founded in 1868 with intermediate level classes at Cuttack Zilla School – known now as Ravenshaw Collegiate School — the Ravenshaw University became a degree college in 1876 and eventually became a state university. The college was named after Thomas Edward Ravenshaw, a British officer who remained in charge of Orissa until 1878, and was initially affiliated to Calcutta University. Meanwhile, Odisha government has directed all departments to ensure strict compliance with the provisions of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 by all institutions/organisations. In a letter to all secretaries and collectors, the Odisha Chief Secretary Manoj Ahuja asked for strict implementation of the POSH (Prevention of Sexual Harassment) Act in workplaces and institutions to ensure a safe, respectful and inclusive environment, particularly for women.
NDTV
23 minutes ago
- NDTV
"Want Prosecution But No Speedy Trial": Top Court Raps Centre Over NIA Cases
In a stern warning to the Centre, the Supreme Court on Friday said it would release the undertrials charged by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) if special courts with requisite infrastructure are not set up for expeditious trial. A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi questioned for how long will the undertrials be kept in custody and gave the Centre a "last opportunity" to set up special courts to tackle the cases. "If the authorities fail to establish special courts with requisite infrastructure to conduct time bound trials, the courts would invariably be without any option but to release undertrials on bail as how long can such suspects be kept behind bars when there is no mechanism for speedy trial and conclude the same in time bound manner," a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi said. The court made the remarks while hearing the bail plea of one Kailash Ramachandani, an undertrial in an NIA case. On May 23, the court had sought the Centre's response, and said trial in such cases should ideally take place on a day-to-day basis. It also emphasised the need to have dedicated courts to deal with trial of special cases under laws like the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act (MCOCA). On May 23, "For how long (should) such suspects be kept in indefinite custody when there is no effective mechanism being provided to conclude trials in a time bound manner," the bench questioned on Friday. The top court made it clear that "if the Union of India and respondent-state government fail to establish exclusive special courts, the prayer of petitioner for release on bail shall be considered on merits on the next date." "This will be the last opportunity," it said. The top court took note of an affidavit filed by the secretary of NIA but said the document does not mention any effective or visible steps taken to conduct expeditious trials. "You want prosecution under special acts also and yet no speedy trial for the accused," the bench said. "The designation of an existing court or entrustment of exclusive trials under NIA Act to such designated courts would be at the cost of other court cases, including 100s of undertrials languishing in jails, senior citizens, marginalized sections, marital disputes, etc," it added. Earlier, the top court said the release or denial of bail is indirectly a breach of Article 21 of the Constitution", it said.
NDTV
an hour ago
- NDTV
Supreme Court Setback For Lalu Yadav Ahead Of Bihar Elections
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday refused to entertain Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) chief Lalu Prasad Yadav's plea against the Delhi High Court's refusal to stay trial court proceedings against him in the land-for-jobs scam case. The top court today said that it is not inclined to interfere with the matter at this stage. A Bench Of Justices MM Sunderesh and N Koteshwar Singh said that "We are not inclined to interfere except by observing that at the time of disposing the final matter the observation made in the impugned order will not stand in the way." The bench observed that "Considering the fact and circumstances of the case we are inclined to pass further order to the effect that he may not be personally present and therefore his appearance is dispensed with. We request the High Court to expedite the hearing. Disposed of accordingly." Mr Yadav has moved the Supreme Court against the Delhi High Court order which had refused to stay CBI proceedings against him in the land-for-jobs corruption case in June this year. Lalu Yadav has challenged that high court order in the top court. A Bench of Justice Ravinder Dudeja had dismissed the application for stay of proceedings and held that there were no compelling reasons warranting judicial interference at the interim stage, especially in light of the pending adjudication before the Supreme Court on the core issue of applicability of Section 17-A PC Act. What is Land-For-Jobs case? It is alleged that the Group-D appointments made in the West Central Zone of the Indian Railway based in Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh, during Lalu Yadav's tenure as the rail minister between 2004 and 2009 were allegedly in return for land parcels gifted or transferred by the recruits in the name of the RJD supremo's family members or associates. The case was registered on May 18, 2022 against Mr Yadav and others, including his wife, two daughters, unidentified public officials and private persons. In his petition in the high court, Lalu Yadav had sought the quashing of the FIR as well as the three chargesheets filed in 2022, 2023 and 2024 and the consequential orders of cognisance. It was his argument that the FIR was lodged in 2022, that is, almost after a delay of 14 years, despite the CBI's initial enquiries and investigations being closed after the filing of the closure report before the competent court.
