Shimla, Aug. 10 -- The Himachal high court has ruled that a 16-year-old boy accused of raping a seven-year-old girl multiple times in 2021 could be tried as an adult, saying the accused's actions, including threatening the survivor and cleaning up evidence, showed that he "understood the consequences of his crime". A bench of justice Rakesh Kainthla upheld the Juvenile Justice Board's (JJB) 2024 recommendation that the accused be tried as an adult following a preliminary assessment conducted by the medical board. The assessment, conducted in accordance with Section 15 of the Juvenile Justice Care and Protection of Children Act, 2015, found that the accused had an IQ of 92 and was fully aware of the consequences of his acts. "The conduct of the petitioner (juvenile) of repeatedly raping the victim, cleaning the blood and threatening her not to reveal the incident to any person, showed that the petitioner was aware of the consequences of his act," the high court said in its order delivered on July 28, made available on August 7. "Hence, the findings recorded by the JJB cannot be said to be bad. These findings are sustainable based on the material on record." The teenager is accused of raping the girl multiple times when she visited his house on February 12, 2021. The girl, in her submission, alleged the accused took her to a cowshed where he raped her and then to his house where she was raped again. The boy was charged under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Section 4 of Protection of children from sexual offences (Pocso) Act. The JJB, in June 2024 , ordered the medical board to conduct a preliminary assessment. Based on the board's assessment, JJB referred the case to the children's court for the accused to be tried as an adult. "The nature of the offence suggested that the petitioner knew the consequences of his act. The statement of the victim showed that the offence was committed in a calculated manner, and the petitioner had sufficient mental and physical capacity to commit the crime. Therefore, the matter was submitted to the children's court for trying the petitioner as an adult," JJB said in its June 2024 ruling. The accused moved the high court challenging the ruling, asserting that the preliminary assessment was not concluded within three months as provided under Section 14(3) of the JJ Act. The high court, however, dismissed these arguments, saying "the time period of three months is directory and not mandatory, and the submission that the proceedings are vitiated due to non-completion of the inquiry within three months vitiated the inquiry cannot be accepted."...