Friday, Oct 31, 2014

Supreme Court refuses to lower age of ‘juvenile’

The court said in its 68-page judgement that the object of the JJ Act was to rehabilitate such offenders so that they could become useful members of the society later on. (IE) The court said that the object of the JJ Act was to rehabilitate such offenders so that they could become useful members of the society later on. (IE)
Press Trust of India | New Delhi | Posted: March 28, 2014 9:07 pm

The Supreme Court today refused to lower the age of juvenile from 18 years saying the legislature has fixed the age which is constitutionally permissible.

A three-judge bench, headed by Chief Justice P Sathasivam, rejected two petitions, filed by BJP leader Subramanian Swamy and parents of December 16 gangrape victim, challenging the constitutional validity of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2000.

“If the legislature has adopted the age of 18 as the dividing line between juveniles and adults and such a decision is constitutionally permissible, the enquiry by the courts must come to an end. Even otherwise there is a considerable body of world opinion that all under 18 persons ought to be treated as juveniles and separate treatment ought to be meted out to them so far as offences committed by such persons are concerned,” the bench, also comprising justices Ranjan Gogoi and Shiv Kirti Singh, said.

The petitioners had sought fresh interpretation of the term ‘juvenile’ in the statute and leaving it to the criminal court, instead of Juvenile Justice Board (JJB), to determine the juvenility of an offender in heinous crimes.

They pleaded the juvenile accused in December 16, 2012 gangrape victim be prosecuted in a criminal court in view of the gravity of his offence. The bench, however, upheld the constitutional validity of the Act and dismissed the petitions.

The court said in its 68-page judgement that the object of the JJ Act was to rehabilitate such offenders so that they could become “useful members” of the society later on.

“India has accepted the above position and legislative wisdom has led to the enactment of the JJ Act in its present form. If the Act has treated all under 18 as a separate category for the purposes of differential treatment so far as the commission of offences are concerned, we do not see how the contentions advanced by the petitioners to the contrary on the strength of the thinking and practices in other jurisdictions can have any relevance,” it said.

The apex court also said there was no difficulty in understanding the clear and unambiguous meaning of different provisions of the JJ Act.

“There is no ambiguity, much less any uncertainty, in the language used to convey what the legislature had intended. All persons below the age of 18 are put in one class/group by the (JJ) Act to provide a separate scheme of investigation, trial and punishment for offences committed by them.

“A class of persons is sought to be created who are treated differently. This is being done to further/effectuate the views of the international community which India has continued…

comments powered by Disqus
Featured ad: Discount Shopping