On September 5, 2018, Siddharth Sanghvi, a 39-year-old vice-president with HDFC Bank, was reported missing after he did not return home from his workplace at Kamala Mills in Worli. (Photo enhanced using AI)A sessions court on Thursday rejected a plea filed by the accused arrested for the 2018 murder of a multinational bank’s vice-president, which claimed he was a minor at the time of the offence. The court said that the accused was unable to produce any record in support of his claim that he was a juvenile on September 5, 2018, when he is alleged to have killed Siddharth Sanghvi, and hence he would be considered an adult on the day of the offence.After conflicting reports emerged from the schools the accused attended in Uttar Pradesh, the court ordered a bone ossification test to determine his age.“The report of the ossification test clearly shows his age between 25 and 28, including the margin of error. Nothing is on record to disbelieve the report…no other material on record is shown by the accused to establish his juvenility on the day of the alleged incident,” additional sessions judge Anil D Salunkhe said.On September 5, 2018, Sanghvi, a 39-year-old vice-president with HDFC Bank, was reported missing after he did not return home from his workplace at Kamala Mills in Worli. His family approached the police and a search was conducted. Five days later, his body was found from a hilly area in Thane district. The police had arrested a driver for the murder, claiming that Sanghvi was killed with a motive of robbery.The trial against the accused began in 2022. In January 2025, the accused told court that on the day of the offence, his age was 17 years, 1 month and 16 days. He submitted a school leaving certificate from a school in Uttar Pradesh to support this claim. The prosecution, however, opposed his plea stating that among the documents seized from him were a driving licence, which showed his age to be 20 in 2018.The court called for the school records, which produced two certificates, both listing different birth dates. Due to the conflicting reports, the court ordered an ossification test at J J Hospital to determine his age. On May 23, 2025, the hospital’s panel gave a report that the accused was between the ages of 25-28 on the day of the test, ‘including margin of error’. The accused’s lawyer, Wahab Khan, told court that considering this margin of error, his age can be determined to be 17 years at the time of the offence. Prosecutor Ashwini Rayakar said that the plea was to prolong the trial and that the accused had no record to prove his claim.