Explanation:

This question addresses a critical procedural aspect under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (JJ Act, 2015), specifically dealing with situations where a child in conflict with law attains majority during the pendency of an inquiry. The JJ Act emphasizes the principle of 'age at the time of commission of offense'. **Analysis of Options:** * **Option (1) continue the inquiry treating him as an adult:** This option is incorrect. The fundamental principle of the JJ Act is that the age of the person at the time of the commission of the offense is determinative. If the person was a child (below 18 years) when the offense was committed, they are to be dealt with under the JJ Act, regardless of whether they turn 18 during the inquiry or trial. Treating them as an adult would defeat the protective and rehabilitative purpose of the Act. While the inquiry continues, the *treatment* remains as a child, not an adult. * **Option (2) stop the inquiry:** This option is incorrect. The inquiry cannot simply be stopped because the child has turned 18. This would lead to a miscarriage of justice, as the alleged offense would go unaddressed. The legal process must continue to its logical conclusion, ensuring that the child's case is properly adjudicated under the appropriate legal framework. * **Option (3) continue the inquiry but will not pass any order:** This option is incorrect. If the inquiry continues, it must lead to a conclusion, which includes passing appropriate orders based on the findings. The Board's function is to conduct inquiries and pass orders for the care, protection, and rehabilitation of children in conflict with law. To continue the inquiry without passing any order would render the entire process meaningless and leave the child's fate unresolved. * **Option (4) continue the inquiry and may pass order treating the child as continuing to be a child.** This is the correct answer. Section 9(3) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, specifically addresses this situation. It states: "Where a person has completed eighteen years of age but the Child Welfare Committee or the Board, as the case may be, finds that the person had committed the offence when he was below the age of eighteen years, then, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, the Child Welfare Committee or the Board shall pass the order in respect of such person as if he had continued to be a child." This provision ensures that the protective and rehabilitative measures of the JJ Act are applied to individuals who were children at the time of the offense, even if they age out of childhood during the legal process. The inquiry continues, and the Board retains its jurisdiction to pass orders appropriate for a child, focusing on rehabilitation rather than punitive measures typically applied to adults. Therefore, the Board will continue the inquiry and pass orders as if the individual were still a child, upholding the core principles of the JJ Act.