Porsche car crash: JJB rejects police plea for trying 17 yr old minor driver as an adult
Two IT engineers Aneesh Awadhiya and his friend Ashwini Koshta, both aged 24 and hailing from Madhya Pradesh, were killed after the speeding Porsche driven by a 17-year-old boy allegedly in an inebriated state hit their motorcycle around 2.30 am on May 19, 2024.
Same day, a first information report (FIR) was lodged against the minor car driver at the Yerwada police station. Subsequently, citing sections of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, the Pune city police filed an application at JJB, seeking an order that the child in conflict with law (CCL) be tried as an adult in this case.
Prosecution had argued that CCL (minor car driver) accused committed a 'heinous offence' and was driving the Porsche car after consuming liquor despite knowing its consequences
The defence lawyer opposed the application saying the present offence cannot be legally termed as 'heinous. The defence lawyer had also argued that the object of Juvenile Justice (JJ) Act is 'reformative' and not 'punitive'.
A senior police officer confirmed that the JJB today passed an order in favour of the CCL. Earlier, when police had detained the minor and produced him before the JJB on May 19, he was granted by the JJB on conditions that he would 'write an essay of 300 words' on 'topic in effect of road accidents and their solutions', assist RTO officers and practice and study traffic rules for 15 days.
But, following a public uproar, the minor was sent to an observation home on May 22. Apparently, the police again submitted applications at the JJB on May 21 and May 22, for trying the CCL as an adult.
The minor's paternal aunt had then moved a plea before the high court (HC) and sought his release, claiming that as per the JJ Act 2015, it needs to be ensured that any conflict with the law does not result in him turning into a hardened criminal. On June 25, the HC ordered the minor's release and that he be handed over into the care of his paternal aunt. Subsequently, the minor was released from the observation home.
Meanwhile, the police investigation had revealed that when the minor driver, who is son of a prominent realtor, was taken to the government-run Sassoon Hospital after the accident for a medical examination, his blood sample was allegedly replaced with his mother's.
A police probe also confirmed that blood samples of the two friends of the minor driver, who were in the Porsche at the time of the accident, were also swapped at Sassoon hospital.
Police arrested and chargesheeted ten persons including the minor's parents, Dr Ajay Taware, the then head of the Forensic Medicine Department of Sassoon Hospital, Dr Shrihari Halnor, the casualty medical officer at the time, Atul Ghatkamble, a morgue staff and others. They are booked under Indian Penal Code (IPC) sections 304, 279, 338, 337, 427, 120 (b), 201, 213, 214, 466, 467, 468, 471, 109 and sections of the Motor Vehicle Act and Prevention of Corruption Act.
Special public prosecutor (SPP) Shishir Hiray had argued at the JJB that minor accused had been booked under IPC sections 467 (forgery) and 304 (culpable homicide not amounting to murder), which attract punishment of life imprisonment or imprisonment for up to ten year. 'So he has committed a 'heinous offence' as per section 2 (33) of JJ Act, which says that offences having punishment of imprisonment for seven years or more are 'heinous', Hiray had argued.
Prosecution had submitted that in case of a heinous offence, as per section 15 (1) of JJ Act, the JJB shall conduct a preliminary assessment of a minor's mental and physical capacity to commit such offence, his ability to understand the consequences of the offence and the circumstances in which he allegedly committed the said crime. Prosecution submitted that after the preliminary assessment under section 15 (1), the JJB can, under section 18 (3) of the JJ Act, pass an order for trial of the minor as an adult.
SPP Hiray had argued before the JJB the actual driver of the Porsche had asked the minor not to drive the car. 'But still the minor drove the Porsche after consuming liquor and committed the crime. He knew the consequences of driving under the influence of alcohol. He was present at the Sassoon hospital when his blood samples were swapped. He knew swapping blood samples was a crime. So he was aware of the consequences of the offence and should be tried as an adult,' Hiray had said.
Defence lawyer Prashant Patil submitted before the JJB that the CCL has no prior criminal record and the Porsche crash incident, though unfortunate, arose out of a moment of poor judgement, not criminal intention.
Citing a Supreme Court judgement in Shilpa Mittal versus State of Delhi case, Patil had claimed that the present offence may not legally qualify as 'heinous' and hence section (15) of JJ Act should not be invoked in this case.
Patil had also submitted that as per section 2 (12) of JJ Act, any person below the age of 18 years is considered a child. Patil argued the goal of juvenile justice is to 'rehabilitate' and not to punish the minor in the same way as for adults.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
8 drug addicts escape from Govt de-addiction centre in Punjab's Sangrur
Eight drug addicts allegedly escaped from a government-run de-addiction centre in Punjab's Sangrur district after reportedly attacking a policeman and a nurse with steel plates during dinner time on Tuesday evening, the police said. The police have formed multiple teams to trace and apprehend the escapees of the centre at Ghabdan village, said an officer. The policeman, identified as Malkeet Singh, was injured and is undergoing treatment at a hospital. 'I was attacked on the neck, and they tried to strangulate me, due to which I became unconscious. Many inmates tried to flee, but the staff managed to control some. A few still managed to escape,' he told reporters on Wednesday. Sartaj Singh Chahal, Senior Superintendent of Police, Sangrur, said, 'Follow-up is being done by the administration with the officials at the de-addiction centre. They were addicts, not criminals. Hence, it needs to be dealt with sensitivity.' SSP Chahal told The Indian Express, 'Several people come for rehabilitation. Some are a bit mischievous. That is what rehabilitation is for. It is essential to see the daily practical efforts at the ground level. The war against drugs is made up of daily battles, some obvious, some unobtrusive.' Most of the inmates were previously arrested under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, but were sent to the rehabilitation centre as they were drug addicts, revealed sources. A similar incident was reported at the facility in January last year, where nine addicts escaped under almost identical circumstances — attacking the staff with steel plates during dinner.
News18
2 hours ago
- News18
‘2006 Blast Acquittals Over Seal For RDX, Minor Details': Why SC Agreed To Hear Maharashtra's Plea
Maharashtra Plea Against HC 2006 Mumbai Train Blasts Case Acquittals: The Maharashtra government said the recovery of RDX was disbelieved on a "hyper-technical ground" The Supreme Court (SC) on Tuesday agreed to hear on Thursday the Maharashtra government 's appeal challenging the Bombay High Court (HC) judgment acquitting all 12 accused. On July 11, 2006, seven blasts within a span of 11 minutes in the first-class compartments of Western Railway (WR) local trains left 189 dead and several injured. The MCOCA court in September 2015 convicted 12 of the 13 arrested in the case. Kamal Ansari (now dead), Mohammad Faisal Ataur Rahman Shaikh, Ehtesham Qutubuddin Siddiqui, Naveed Hussain Khan and Asif Khan were sentenced to death, while Tanveer Ahmed Mohammed Ibrahim Ansari, Mohammed Majid Mohammed Shafi, Shaikh Mohammed Ali Alam Shaikh, Mohammed Sajid Margub Ansari, Muzammil Ataur Rahman Shaikh, Suhail Mehmood Shaikh and Zameer Ahmed Rehman Shaikh were sentenced to life imprisonment. The Bombay High Court (HC) on Monday acquitted all 12 accused, saying the prosecution utterly failed to prove the case and it was 'hard to believe they committed the crime". The Maharashtra government has appealed against the HC judgment on grounds that the recovery of RDX from an accused was disbelieved on a 'hyper-technical ground" that the seized explosives were not sealed with a lac seal. Earlier in the day, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, on behalf of the state government, mentioned the plea before an apex court bench headed by Chief Justice B R Gavai and sought an urgent hearing. The court agreed to hear it on July 24. The state government, in its appeal, has raised several serious objections to the high court's order of acquittal. The plea has asserted that due procedural safeguards under Section 23(2) of Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) were observed, including proper sanctioning by senior officers like prosecution witness (PW) no. 185 Anami Roy. It said the high court overlooked the validity of these approvals despite no substantial contradiction in the prosecution's evidence. #WATCH | Mumbai: On Bombay High Court acquitting all 12 people in relation to 2006 Mumbai train bombings, Maharashtra CM Devendra Fadnavis says, 'The verdict of the Bombay High Court is very shocking and we will challenge it in the Supreme Court." — ANI (@ANI) July 21, 2025 Lac seal for RDX: What Maharashtra government said in plea The plea has assailed the high court's rejection of the recovery of 500 grams of RDX from one of the accused on the ground that it lacked a lac seal. The plea has said that RDX, being highly inflammable, was not sealed for safety reasons and the recovery was duly sanctioned and documented. 'That, the Hon'ble High Court has disbelieved the recovery of 500 gms of RDX from Accused No. 1 on a hyper-technical ground that the RDX which was seized was not sealed with a lac seal. It will be pertinent to note that the same was not sealed with a lac seal because RDX is an inflammable substance. 'It is pertinent to note that the High Court records that the sanctioning authority for explosive substances has been examined by the prosecution. However, the Hon'ble High Court has not found any infirmities in the evidence of PW 26, who is the sanctioning authority under the Explosive Substances Act for seizure of RDX from Accused No. 1. Therefore, the High Court has erred in disbelieving the recovery of RDX from Accused No. 1," the plea has said. Minute details in confession: What Maharashtra government said in plea It has also disputed the high court's dismissal of the confession of an accused for lacking minute details, such as the date of arrival of the Pakistani co-conspirators in India, the description of the six Pakistanis and information like whether they had trained in terrorist camps. 'The entire confessional statement has been disbelieved which is an unacceptable conclusion," the plea has said, adding that omissions regarding the identities and origins of the Pakistani co-conspirators do not invalidate the overall confession. The appeal also challenges the high court's disregard of the recovery of detonators and explosive granules from another accused, pointing out that these items cannot be easily procured or planted, and their evidentiary value should not have been dismissed over technicalities. The petition says the high court failed to address the validity of the convictions under various provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and relevant provisions of the Explosive Substances Act. It says the high court ignored key findings and legal interpretations from previous landmark judgments. The plea addresses the defence's contention that the accused did not meet the definition of 'continuing unlawful activity" under the MCOCA due to earlier offences being punishable by less than three years. top videos View all Citing Supreme Court precedents, the plea says the conspiracy and scale of the attack clearly fall under MCOCA provisions. With PTI Inputs About the Author News Desk The News Desk is a team of passionate editors and writers who break and analyse the most important events unfolding in India and abroad. From live updates to exclusive reports to in-depth explainers, the Desk More tags : 2006 Mumbai Train Blasts 2006 Mumbai Train Bomb Blast Bombay High Court Devendra Fadnavis supreme court view comments Location : Mumbai, India, India First Published: July 23, 2025, 13:20 IST News cities '2006 Blast Acquittals Over Seal For RDX, Minor Details': Why SC Agreed To Hear Maharashtra's Plea Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
New Indian Express
2 hours ago
- New Indian Express
Denied POCSO case, father ends life outside Chitradurga police station; SP orders probe
CHITRADURGA : A distraught father's desperate attempt to register a case under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act against the youth who married his 18-year-old daughter cost him his life. Ajjayya (54), a farmer from Gilikenahalli, consumed poison in front of Holalkere police station on Sunday. The police shifted him to Chitradurga District Hospital but he died on Monday. Irate villagers and Ajjayya's family members kept the body near the police station. The mob also tried to attack the DySP, forcing the cops to resort to lathicharge. The Gilikenahalli marriage story unfolded first as a missing complaint case filed by the girl's mother at the Holalkere police station. What made things difficult for the police were two separate birth certificates that raised questions over the adult status of the daughter, Sanjana. As per the birth certificate produced by the mother, Pushpa, Sanjana was 19 and studying for an undergraduate course. On July 15, Sanjana and her husband, Raghu, appeared before the police and said they are adults and have married. The police then closed the missing case complaint. But Ajjayya produced another birth certificate, this time from Davanagere Corporation, stating the girl was under 18 years. The police did not budge and refused to register a case under POCSO Act against Raghu, who also hails from the same village as that of Ajayya. Superintendent of Police Ranjith Kumar Bandaru on Tuesday held a press conference in the city and said that they would investigate Ajjayya's suicide. (If you are having suicidal thoughts, or are worried about a friend or need emotional support, someone is always there to listen. Call Sneha Foundation - 04424640050, Tele Manas - 14416 (available 24x7) or iCall, the Tata Institute of Social Sciences' helpline - 02225521111, which is available Monday to Saturday from 8 am to 10 pm.)
