Why Punjab and Haryana High Court refused to try a woman as an adult for her mother-in-law’s murder

The court added that it has also come on record that the preliminary assessment in the present case has been delayed by nearly four years after the occurrence, and by that time, the juvenile/accused had attained the age of majority.

According to the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2015, a preliminary assessment is to be conducted about the mental and physical capacity of the juvenile to commit such an offence and the ability to understand the consequences of the offence and the circumstances in which he allegedly committed the offence.

Findings

• It is also an admitted fact that the age of the juvenile/accused at the time of the occurrence was 17 years and 19 days. Meaning thereby, at the time of her marriage, she was even less than 15 years of age.
• Thus, her current mental capacity could not reflect the state of mind at the time of the occurrence of the alleged offence.
• Furthermore, it has been rightly observed by the trial court that assessment under Section 15 (alleged to have been committed by child who has completed or its above age of 16 years, preliminary assessment is to be conducted about mental and physical capacity of juvenile to commit such offence and ability to understand the consequences of offence and circumstances in which he allegedly committed the offence) of the Act is not merely a mechanical exercise but a crucial determination of all the aspects, viz, psychological, social, and emotional, while assessing a child’s culpability potential.
• When the narrative of the factual matrix of the present case is considered in totality, this court finds no illegality or perversity in the JJB order in 2024, and as affirmed in the appeal, also by the trial court by passing a detailed and well-reasoned judgment dated in October 2025.
• As a sequel to the above discussion, the present criminal revision petition is dismissed, being devoid of any merit.

Background

• The case stems from an incident on June 23, 2020, where the daughter-in-law allegedly poured kerosene oil on her mother-in-law and set her on fire following a domestic quarrel.
• The victim succumbed to her injuries in July 2020, which led to the addition of Section 302 (murder) of the IPC.
• According to the prosecution, at the time of the incident, the accused daughter-in-law was 17 years and 19 days old.
• JJB and the trial court both ruled that the accused should be tried as a juvenile.
• The son of the victim and the husband of the accused challenged the order of the JJB and the trial court order in the high court.