(1) In case of a heinous offence alleged to have been committed by a child, who has completed or is above the age of sixteen years, the Board shall conduct a preliminary assessment with regard to his mental and physical capacity to commit such offence, ability to understand the consequences of the offence and the circumstances in which he allegedly committed the offence, and may pass an order in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (3) of section 18:
Provided that for such an assessment, the Board may take the assistance of experienced psychologists or psycho-social workers or other experts.
Explanation.— For the purposes of this sub-section, it is clarified that preliminary assessment is not a trial, but is to assess the capacity of such child to commit and understand the consequences of the alleged offence.
Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 15
Section 15 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 introduces a pivotal mechanism empowering the Board to conduct a preliminary assessment to determine whether a child aged sixteen to eighteen accused of a heinous crime should be tried as an adult.
The proviso to sub-section (1) clarifies that this assessment is not a trial on merits, but a specialized evaluation of developmental maturity and cognitive culpability. Sub-section (2) requires this assessment to be completed within three months from the date of first production. If the Board concludes that the child should be tried as an adult, it passes an order under Section 18(3) transferring the case to the Children's Court.
Section 15 constitutes the most heavily debated paradigm shift in the 2015 Act. By enabling the transfer of older adolescents to adult criminal courts, Parliament created an exception to universal juvenile immunity. The Supreme Court's ruling in Master Bholu serves as an essential safeguard, ensuring that JJBs do not treat preliminary assessments as casual formalities, requiring rigorous psychological evaluations before stripping a child of juvenile protections.