Pune, 16 July 2025: In a significant decision, the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) on Monday rejected the Pune Police's plea to prosecute the minor boy involved in the Kalyaninagar car crash as an adult. The accused, who was reportedly driving a high-end Porsche under the influence of alcohol, had allegedly caused the deaths of two IT engineers in May 2024.
The board, headed by Principal Magistrate Garima Bagrodia and members Adv. Smita Jamdar and Adv. Bedi Borde, ruled that the boy will face trial under the provisions applicable to juveniles.
While rejecting the police plea, the board noted that under Section 15 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act, a minor cannot be transferred to an adult criminal court unless the crime qualifies as a heinous offence. The board further stated that this section only applies to serious offences, and the current case does not meet the legal criteria to try the boy as an adult.
The tragic incident occurred on May 18, 2024, when a speeding Porsche allegedly driven by the 17-year-old rammed into a two-wheeler in Kalyaninagar, killing a young man and woman. CCTV footage and police investigations confirmed the boy had consumed alcohol before the crash. He was granted bail within hours on a bond of ₹7,500, which triggered widespread public outrage.
Following the backlash, the police had filed a review petition to revise the bail order. The board later sent the boy to a juvenile correctional facility citing safety concerns, though he was granted bail again after some time.
The prosecution, through special public prosecutor Shishir Hire, urged the JJB to allow the minor to be tried as an adult, citing serious evidence like CCTV footage, proof of alcohol consumption, and the alleged conspiracy to tamper with blood samples at Sassoon Hospital. The police argued that these actions reflected a pattern of criminal intent.
Representing the boy, Advocate Prashant Patil countered that there were no legal grounds to treat the accused as an adult. He cited Supreme Court precedents, arguing that such a step could only be taken under very specific conditions, which this case did not meet. He also contended that the crime should not be classified as a heinous offence and that the boy deserves a chance at reform under the juvenile justice system.
Although the prosecution insisted that the case be transferred to an adult criminal court due to the gravity of the offence, the JJB ruled that the current circumstances and legal provisions do not justify such a transfer. Following this verdict, the investigating authorities and related departments are expected to discuss the next steps, including whether to appeal the board’s decision. According to legal expert Shishir Hire, this case highlights the urgent need for a broader debate on the legal and judicial treatment of serious offences committed by minors in India.
