The Supreme Court on Monday urged the government to bring about necessary changes in the juvenile law in order to have a deterrent effect and to send a message to the society that life of the victim was equally important under the rule of law.
Stating it was “extremely difficult” to accept that a juvenile delinquent would not be aware of the consequences while committing crimes like rape, murder and dacoity, the court said that the spurt in involvement of minors in such heinous crimes called upon an imperative need to mull changes in the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000.
“A time has come to think of an effective law to deal with the situation, we would request the learned Attorney General to bring it to the notice of the concerned authorities so that the relevant provisions under the Act can be re-looked, re-scrutinized and re-visited, at least in respect of offences which are heinous in nature,” said a bench led by Justice Dipak Misra.
The court was hearing a case where an accused in a murder case had claimed he was juvenile at the time of the incident and hence he should be accorded the immunity under the Act. A juvenile can not be sent to jail under the existing law and the maximum punishment for a delinquent can be three years’ detention in a correctional home.
Adjudicating the matter, the bench noted that the accused, along with four others, had allegedly killed a man for not repaying the debt. “Whether in such a situation, can it be conceived by any stretch of imagination that the petitioner was not aware of the consequences? Or for that matter, was it a crime committed, if proven, with a mind that was not matured enough? Or the life of the victim is totally immaterial, for five people, including a juvenile, think unless somebody pays the debt, he can face his death,” it pointed out.
The court told Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi that the issue was serious and required a sincere deliberation by the lawmakers since the rate of crime and the nature of crime, in which the juvenile are getting involved, have increased. It further recalled another case in which the bench had favoured changes in the juvenile law so as to have a nexus between the nature of crime and the age of juvenility.
The AG agreed that the crime rate by juveniles have shot up and that it called for a re-look at the existing provisions in the Act. Rohatgi assured the bench that he would have a discussion with the competent authorities and file the government’s response by way of an affidavit. The court fixed the case for further hearing in May.
Notably, a parliamentary panel has in February rejected the government’s proposal to try juveniles as adults for heinous crimes. The women and child development ministry proposed juveniles who fell between the ages of 16 to 18 years and were guilty of heinous crimes or found to be repeat offenders of crimes like kidnapping, trafficking, attempt to murder or outraging the modesty of women could be liable for a longer prison term than what has been mandated under the Act.
The court told Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi that the issue was serious and required a sincere deliberation by the lawmakers since the rate of crime and the nature of crime, in which the juvenile are getting involved, have increased.
Share
