Upload
friends-of-dr-swamy
View
217
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/13/2019 AGENDA on Flaws of Juvenile Law in India
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/agenda-on-flaws-of-juvenile-law-in-india 1/5
AGENDA on flaws of Juvenile law in India
Dr Subramanian Swamy
The juvenile accused of the Delhi rape case is not a petty unlawful who could be reformed.
Instead, he acted like a hardened criminal who knew what he was doing. Imagine if Ajmal
Kasab was a minor: Would we have handled him with kid gloves?
Centuries ago, a great thinker called Plato had stated what has now become a real-life
scenario in India, “Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad
people will find a way around the laws.”
On the unfortunate evening of December 16, 2012, a 23-year-old girl, a budding
physiotherapy student, and her male friend were awaiting a bus at the Munirka bus stand
around 9:30 pm. One bus conductor invited the two youngsters to board his private chartered
bus on the pretext of dropping them to their destination. Once the girl and her friend boarded
the bus, they realised that the conductor was a malicious person who, with four others, started
making lewd advances. The male friend tried to intervene but was overpowered and beaten
up with an iron rod. The girl kept fighting but was hit hard and fell down.
Thereafter, all heavens fell on the poor girl. On the floor of the speeding bus, the bus
conductor and the five others, including the driver, took turns to rape her. But this was not
enough for the bus conductor: He raped the victim twice, once while she was unconscious
due to the trauma inflicted on her. Then, he inserted an iron rod into her private parts to
wrench out her uterus as well as intestines. He explained to his associates that it was
necessary for the destruction of evidence. After an hour of this inconceivable savagery, the
victim and her male friend were stripped naked and thrown out of the bus into the freezing
winter night.
8/13/2019 AGENDA on Flaws of Juvenile Law in India
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/agenda-on-flaws-of-juvenile-law-in-india 2/5
After some delay the victim was admitted to Safdarjung Hospital where multiple surgeries
were done to save her life. She fought bravely to live and in great pain conveyed her mother
to “never let that conductor escape from law”. But the damage was so severe t hat even
transplants of her organs were of no avail. On December 26, the victim, who displayed
indomitable spirit to live against all odds and her determination to punish the guilty, was sent
to a Singapore hospital in a comatose state to avail better treatment. But it was already too
late by then as the girl breathed her last on December 29, leaving behind a nation whose
conscience was totally shaken by the brutality of the incident. Everyone thought if this could
happen in the most secured zone of the Capital at a time when Delhi was buzzing with
people, then no one was safe in the country.
A WILY CRIMINAL
But the question remains: Why do we need to tell the account which happened one-and-a-half
months ago? The story needs reiteration because it tells us that the bus conductor, who now
claims to be a minor (below the age of 18 years), is not a petty unlawful who could be
reformed; instead, he acted like a hardened criminal who knew what he was doing; he
committed the act eagerly and tried to destroy the evidence of his heinous crime.
Also, the fact that the bus conductor acted swiftly to claim his „minor -hood‟ shows his cold,
demented mindset. He himself told the police that he was a juvenile and hence enjoyed
special protection and waiver from criminal law. The police at the inspector level were
stumped. A hidden hand moved swiftly to make the police “respect the law”, which is
codified for delinquents under the age of 18 years in the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 and as
amended in 2006 and 2010.
Had this 18-year cutoff not been there, the accused would have been prosecuted under
Section 83 read with Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and received a minimum
8/13/2019 AGENDA on Flaws of Juvenile Law in India
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/agenda-on-flaws-of-juvenile-law-in-india 3/5
punishment of seven years of imprisonment. But the trouble with the laws these days is that
criminals know their rights better than their wrongs.
The accused was a few months short of 18 years of age and if we all acquiesce, he would not
be prosecuted under IPC but “reformed and rehabilitated” in a homely atmosphere under
Sections 2(g), 15 and 16 of the Juvenile Justice Act (2000), under which after a maximum of
three years he would be let free. Even Ajmal Kasab, involved in the dastardly 26/11 Mumbai
attacks, would have been treated „humanely‟ had he attacked India when he was a few years
younger.
The inspiration for this Act came from the United Nations Convention on Rights of Child
1989, the United Nation Standard Minimum Rules for Administration of Juvenile Justice
(Beijing Rules) 1985, and the United Nation Rules for Protection of Children Deprived of
their Liberty 1990. India is a signatory of the above mentioned conventions and rules. The
Preamble and the statement of objects and reasons of the Act state the same expressly and
categorically.
This Act is a piece of “beneficial”, not criminal law, legislation and has been formulated to
protect the innocence of our nation‟s greatest asset — its children and youth. But in the
current case, the extreme malice and depravity with which the accused has allegedly
committed the crime shows that it is not the action of a juvenile delinquent who the law
supposes to be of tender age and mind and not fully capable of being responsible for his
actions, but rather these are actions of the most evil of men for whom this beneficial
legislation clearly is not meant.
BETWEEN THE LINES
The question for the nation is: Should we allow the cold print of a law, the Juvenile Justice
Act, framed for children committing crimes like pick-pocketing, bicycle theft, etc, be used
unthinkingly to benefit, by exempting from prosecution under criminal law, those committing
8/13/2019 AGENDA on Flaws of Juvenile Law in India
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/agenda-on-flaws-of-juvenile-law-in-india 4/5
heinous crimes such as rape and murder, which cannot be committed unless the culprit knew
what he was doing.
Also, the Act is not in complete consonance with these conventions and rules. The Beijing
Rules 4(1) describes the concept of age of “Criminal Responsibility” as for which there are
various factors which have to be considered in deciding when and at what age would a
juvenile be held criminally responsible for his/her actions. These factors include but are not
restricted to moral and psychological development, individual discernment and
understanding, seriousness of the offence involved, record and previous history of the
juvenile, etc. Furthermore, there is no blanket ban or prohibition in not holding the juvenile
accused accountable for his offences.
Article 17.1(c) of the Beijing Rules state that even though endeavour is to be made to avoid
incarceration in certain situations/offences, sentence of imprisonment has to be passed not
only to punish the offender but also to protect public safety. The UNCRC 1989 and Beijing
Rules 1985 recognised that neither there can be any hard-and-fast rule nor can there be a
blanket protection solely on age criteria, and in appropriate cases criminal behaviour has to
be punished with lengthy imprisonment.
In the United States, the Criminal Justice System recognises the concept of age of Criminal
Responsibility and juveniles who are 14 years of age and above and guilty
of grievous crimes are held responsible for the same. They are tried under the Criminal
Justice System like an adult. The law in England recognises the fact that knowledge and
ability to reason are still developing, but the notion that a 10-year-old (the age of Criminal
Responsibility) does not know right from wrong seems contrary to common sense in an age
of compulsory education from the age of five, when children seem to develop faster both
mentally and physically.
8/13/2019 AGENDA on Flaws of Juvenile Law in India
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/agenda-on-flaws-of-juvenile-law-in-india 5/5
Thus, we need to read into the juvenile age limit of 18 years, the UN Convention ordained
caveat, which India has already ratified in 1992 that this age limit is subject to the Beijing
Rules 4(1) and ascertainment of the juvenile not being emotionally and intellectually mature
to know what he or she was doing is necessary. This has already been incorporated in Rule 3
of the Juvenile Justice Act but surprisingly, because of the Law Ministry‟s poor drafting, left
out of the Act itself!
Hence, the UPA Government must issue an Ordinance to clarify that a juvenile accused as
below 18 years is subject to satisfying Rule 4(1) of the Beijing Rules; otherwise, the juvenile
accused will be tried under the IPC. The juvenile accused must be made an example of today
to keep our faith in our legal system and to provide justice to the Delhi braveheart.
I conclude with the wor ds of Mahatma Gandhi: “It would conduce to national progress and
save a great deal of time and trouble if we cultivated the habit of never supporting the
resolutions either by speaking or voting for them if we had not either the intention or the
ability to carry them out.”
As published in Daily Pioneer