PUNE PORSCHE CRASH CASE – JUVENILE JUSTICE OR JUDICIAL LENIENCE

The Pune Porsche crash case, involving a 17½‑year‑old boy who killed two IT professionals while driving under the influence, has reignited debate on the balance between juvenile justice and judicial lenience in India. This paper critically examines the Juvenile Justice Board’s refusal to transfer the case for adult trial, arguing that the decision misapplied precedent and misinterpreted statutory provisions under the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015. By shielding a near‑adult offender under reformative principles, the ruling undermines deterrence, dilutes accountability, and erodes public trust in the justice system. The analysis highlights flaws in statutory interpretation, the neglect of adolescent maturity, and comparative perspectives that recognize sixteen as the age of majority. It further explores how the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, strengthens accountability by categorizing reckless driving under intoxication as a heinous offence. The paper concludes that reform is essential to align juvenile justice with contemporary realities and uphold the integrity of law.