Patna, July 12 :    Patna, July 12:  A teenaged student, who shot dead his friend, has been sentenced to death and two of his accomplices, also students, sent to jail for life. The 'eye-for-an-eye judgment' delivered yesterday by a Patna sessions court has sparked protest from human rights activists and legal luminaries, who were upset that the students, believed to be juveniles, were not tried under the Juvenile Justice Act. The three accused were sent to Beur jail instead of reformatory this morning, provoking an outcry from the rights activists. 'The tragedy of a student's killing by another turned into melodrama when the judgment betrayed a retributive spirit of justice. The judicial system is (there) to reform the delinquents, not kill,' said Kishori Das, general secretary of People's Union for Civil Liberties. Patna sessions judge Sadanand Mukherjee yesterday ordered that Arnit Das, a student of Class X, be hanged till death for pulling the trigger on Abhisekh Singh, an 18-year-old student, in Rajendranagar area of Patna in September 1998. Siddharth Singh and Rohan Sinha, also students, were sentenced for life for their alleged involvement in the murder. The three plotted the murder out of jealousy over Abhisekh's alleged involvement with a girl. Initially, Siddharth was going around with her. But once Abhisekh returned after schooling in Dehradun, the girl turned all her attention on him. This led to cracks in the friendship among the four teenagers and Abhisekh increasingly became alienated. The three boys clandestinely procured a weapon and shot Abhisekh one September evening as he was returning from his teacher's house. The prosecution said Arnit had pulled the trigger. But Arnit's counsel A.N. Sinha picked several loopholes in the judgment. He pointed out that the prosecution had failed to produce the weapon or an eyewitness. He added that the court refused to accept the birth certificate issued by a Calcutta nursing home and Arnit's school certificate as proof of his age while rejecting the plea that he was a minor. The only evidence against Arnit was his statement before the magistrate, which was retracted subsequently and was not corroborated by others. Sinha said the judgement was unnecessarily harsh and 'we would move high court against the order'. Tarakant Jha, a legal expert, said the new Juvenile Justice Act, which came into force in April this year, clearly says pending cases should get the benefit of the Act. It defines a juvenile as one who has not crossed 18 years of age. The medical board set up by the court to determine the age of the accused said they were between 16 and 18. Arnit's mother, Sushmita, felt the age factor should have been of prime consideration, particularly because of the nature of the offence. 'The case is clearly one of teenage vulnerability in matters relating to girls which took a vio-lent turn. The social delinquency in Patna - where weapons are abundantly available and there are few role models - is responsible for the teenagers' rapid drift to problem behaviour. But capital punishment is no solution,' said Santosh Maheswari, a social-psychologist and former professor of Patna University. Even Abhisekh's father, Ajit Singh, said: 'I know my son will not come back. The judgment of the court is a poor solace.' He observed that a behavioural disorder caused by jealousy might have led to the killing. Upalkant Singh, Siddharth's father, felt the boys were all first-time offenders and their cases needed a more sensitive treatment.