The teenager was initially booked for the offences of rash driving and causing death by negligence under Sections 281 and 106(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).
A Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) granted the accused teenager bail on October 26.
Last week, Ernakulam Additional District and Sessions Judge Kavitha Gangadharan dismissed appeals filed by the State and Jayabalakrishnan's relatives against the JJB's decision.
The Additional Sessions Court opined that there were no circumstances warranting denial of bail to the Child in Conflict with Law (CCL) in this case.
Among other observations, the Additional Sessions Court also questioned why an FIR was lodged in this case since the offences alleged against the CCL did not fall under the category of "heinous" crimes.
The teenager was initially booked for the offences of rash driving and causing death by negligence under Sections 281 and 106(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). After continued protests by the victim's family and local residents, the police added more serious offences punishable under Section 105 (culpable homicide not amounting to murder) BNS read with Sections 181, 183, 199A(1) and 199A(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (MVA).
A Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) granted the accused teenager bail on October 26.
Last week, Ernakulam Additional District and Sessions Judge Kavitha Gangadharan dismissed appeals filed by the State and Jayabalakrishnan's relatives against the JJB's decision.
The Additional Sessions Court opined that there were no circumstances warranting denial of bail to the Child in Conflict with Law (CCL) in this case.
Moreover, Judge Gangadharan also flagged several issues in the manner in which the case was handled right from the beginning by the police, the Juvenile Justice Board, the State prosecution, and the family of the deceased.
Among other observations, the Additional Sessions Court also questioned why an FIR was lodged in this case since the offences alleged against the CCL did not fall under the category of "heinous" crimes.
It opined that this was not a case where an FIR should have been filed, as there are child-sensitive methods of investigation prescribed under the law in cases involving a CCL.
