Gurugram Schoolboy Killing: SC Seeks Reply On Juvenile’s Bail Plea Citing Covid

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has sought reply from the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on the bail plea of a juvenile who was arrested for allegedly killing a seven-year-old fellow student at a prestigious school in Gurugram in 2017.

The accused was a Class XI student at the time of the incident.

A bench of Justices Indira Banerjee and M.R. Shah issued notice to the CBI and sought its reply in the matter by July 1.

The juvenile, who has been identified as ‘Master Bholu’ in the case records, was represented by senior advocate Manan Kumar Mishra and advocate Durga Dutt.

The juvenile sought release from an observation home in Karnal citing threat to his life after several of his fellow inmates tested positive for Covid-19.

The petitioner moved the top court challenging the April 28 order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, which had adjourned his plea to July 27.

The petitioner contended that the high court had adjourned the case without appreciating the urgency of the matter, which is ‘utter violation’ of the right to life in the backdrop of the existing pandemic situation.

The petitioner argued that the high court did not consider the alarming Covid situation in the country, with a possibility of a third wave that is likely to affect children and adolescents.

The juvenile submitted that he has already been in the observation home for nearly three years and six months, where 25 out of the 200 inmates had tested positive for Covid-19 in May.

The plea cited that the CBI had filed a charge-sheet on February 5, 2018, along with the citing of 127 witnesses, and the investigation in the matter is already over.

In the chargesheet, the CBI had alleged that the boy killed the student on September 8, 2017, in a bid to postpone the exams and also to cancel a parent-teacher meeting. The victim’s body, with his throat slit, was found in the washroom of the school.

The plea argued that the November 2018 order of the top court had directed maintaining status quo on the issue, and therefore there is no likelihood of the trial to be taken up soon.