Mercedes hit-and-run case: Court seeks reply from police

Additional Sessions Judge Vimal Kumar Yadav fixed July 2 for hearing the arguments of Delhi police and the boy on the appeal.

During the hearing, counsel for the teenager informed the court that they have not got a copy of the charge sheet.

On the court's direction, the investigating officer then provided a copy of the charge sheet and other documents annexed with it to the boy, who along with his parents was also present in the court.

Advocate Abhimanyu Kampani, who appeared for the teenager, said without providing charge sheet to the accused, the Presiding Officer of JJB heard arguments and ordered that the boy be tried as an adult by sending the case before the trial court.

Special Public Prosecutor Atul Shrivastava said as per the amended provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, the sessions court cannot send back the case to the board and if it thinks that the boy should not be tried as an adult, it has to try the case itself by acting as the board's presiding officer.

Police has also filed an application seeking cancellation of bail of the boy's father.

In the appeal, the boy's counsel claimed that at best he could be booked for alleged offence of causing death by rash and negligent act and it was not a case of culpable homicide not amounting to murder for which he has been charged.

It said the boy's previous offences are of traffic violation and not related to accidents. So it's not a ground to convert section 304A of IPC into section 304 of IPC.

On July 2, the court would also hear the main case which was sent to it by JJB that had on June 4 ordered that the boy would face trial as an adult while observing that the offence allegedly committed by him was "heinous".

The board had passed the order on the police's plea seeking transfer of the case to trial court to try the accused as an adult.

It is the first of its kind case since the amendment in the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2015 which allowed the Board to transfer cases of heinous offences by children to the sessions court.