Explained: Why a 53-year-old rape convict will be sentenced as a juvenile
The Court's Ruling: The Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice BR Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih, noted that the prosecution's case was robust, supported by the survivor's testimony, witness statements, and medical evidence.The Court accepted his claim of being a juvenile based on his school records, which were deemed reliable evidence under the Juvenile Justice Act.Despite objections from the Rajasthan government counsel, who argued against granting juvenile status after decades, the court cited prior rulings that the plea of juvenility can be raised at any stage, even after a case's disposal.Consequently, the court set aside the earlier sentence, as it could not be sustained under juvenile justice provisions, and directed the JJB to issue appropriate orders.The JJB may send the man to a special home for a maximum of three years, as per the Juvenile Justice Act.What are the key provisions of India's Juvenile Justice laws relevant to this case?The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, defines a juvenile as a person under 18 at the time of the offense.Juveniles are tried by the Juvenile Justice Board, not adult courts. They cannot face adult penalties like life imprisonment or death.Rehabilitative measures, such as counselling or placement in a juvenile home for up to three years, are prioritised (Section 18).At the time of the offense, the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986, was in effect, defining boys under 16 and girls under 18 as juveniles. However, the Supreme Court applied the beneficial provisions of the 2015 Act, which raised the age to 18 for all children.Why is this case significant?The case underscores that juvenility claims remain valid regardless of the time elapsed or the accused's current age. It reinforces the principle that juveniles must be treated differently, even for serious crimes, and highlights the retrospective application of beneficial juvenile justice provisions.- Ends
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Gujarat high court awards life term to two women for setting another ablaze
Ahmedabad: The Gujarat high court sentenced two women to life imprisonment for burning a woman alive in Porbandar district 15 years ago on basis of her dying declarations. The district court had disbelieved the dying declarations and acquitted the two cousins, in Sep 2012. The state govt challenged the acquittal, and the high court found them guilty of murder and sentenced them. According to case details, the deceased woman was separated from her husband and lived at her maternal home in Ranavav town of Porbandar. One of the two counsins suspected her of intimacy with her husband. The two cousins beat the woman and then poured kerosene and set her ablaze. She was rushed to the hospital. Before she succumbed to her burn injuries, her statements were recorded by a doctor, an executive magistrate, and a police sub-inspector. You Can Also Check: Ahmedabad AQI | Weather in Ahmedabad | Bank Holidays in Ahmedabad | Public Holidays in Ahmedabad When the two cousins were put on trial, there was no direct evidence before the district court. The trial court rejected the dying declarations on the ground that a person who sustained 90-95% burn injuries would not be in a position to give a statement. The trial court also found her thumb impressions doubtful and acquitted the cousins. The HC, after hearing the state govt's appeal, reversed the trial court's order. The bench of Justice C M Roy and Justice D M Vyas found the grounds on which the trial court rejected the dying declarations as "perverse in nature". by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Why Seniors Are Snapping Up This TV Box, We Explain! Techno Mag Learn More Undo The bench said, "Oblivious of the law relating to appreciation of evidence of dying declaration, the trial court recorded the said erroneous findings. The trial court lost sight of the fact that dying declaration is a valid piece of evidence and it cannot be thrown out or rejected on such technicalities, which are legally not tenable. " The HC further stated, "We are of the considered view that the dying declarations of the deceased are true, voluntary and inspire full confidence in the mind of the court regarding the veracity of the statements given by her and the same are to be accepted as a sole basis for conviction of the accused." The convicts pleaded for leniency in punishment, citing their responsibilities for minor children. The HC ordered life imprisonment for them but directed the govt to consider granting the benefit of remission to them after they serve 14 years of sentence. Get the latest lifestyle updates on Times of India, along with Friendship Day wishes , messages and quotes !
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
HC denies pre-arrest bail to man accused of replacing Tricolour on mosque with saffron flag
Chandigarh: Punjab and Haryana high court on Saturday refused anticipatory bail to a man accused of removing the national flag from a mosque in Gurgaon and replacing it with a saffron flag. "The gravity of the offence and its potential impact on public order and communal peace cannot be overlooked. No extraordinary or exceptional circumstance has been brought on record by the petitioner that would warrant the grant of pre-arrest bail, particularly in light of the serious communal and constitutional implications of the alleged conduct," HC observed in its order. "The fact that a deeper and proper probe is required… This court is of the considered opinion that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is a must and no ground for granting anticipatory bail is made out," said Justice Manisha Batra in the order. The bench noted that the allegations against the petitioner were not vague or general in nature but "specific and substantiated by initial investigation", including purported conversations between the petitioner and co-accused when the alleged crime was being committed. Justice Batra dismissed the plea filed by Vikas Tomar of Gurgaon, who was booked at Bilaspur police station in Gurgaon on July 7 for hurting religious sentiments. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Is this legal? Access all TV channels without a subscription! Techno Mag Learn More Undo He faces charges under the Prevention of Insult to National Honours Act, 1971, as well. It's alleged that on July 7, Tomar and some other persons removed the national flag from atop a mosque in Gurgaon's Uton village and erected a saffron flag. Some of the accused even threw away the national flag, says the complaint. The complainant provided a video recording of the incident to police, alleging the co-accused had removed the Indian flag in connivance with Tomar. However, Tomar's counsel, while seeking anticipatory bail, argued that he was falsely implicated and had no role to play in the incident. Opposing the plea, the counsel for the state and the complainant submitted that the accused intended to stir communal tension and that he is shown to have had a conversation with the co-accused when they were involved in removing the national flag and hoisting the saffron flag. After hearing all the parties, HC dismissed the plea for anticipatory bail, keeping in view the nature of allegations and the fact that there were no exceptional circumstances for pre-arrest bail. Get the latest lifestyle updates on Times of India, along with Friendship Day wishes , messages and quotes !
Time of India
4 hours ago
- Time of India
FIR finally registered against unidentified policemen in Somnath Suryawanshi custodial death case
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar: Three days after the Supreme Court upheld the directive of the Aurangabad bench of the Bombay high court — to register an FIR in the Somnath Suryawanshi custodial death case — the Parbhani police finally registered an FIR late on Friday under BNS Section 103 (1) for punishment for murder against unidentified policemen of the New Mondha police station. The FIR follows eight months and several rounds of hearings in the Bombay high court and Supreme Court after the alleged custodial death of 35-year-old law student Suryawanshi. His mother, 60-year-old Vijayabai Suryawanshi, is the complainant in the case. In her complaint, Vijayabai said on the morning of Dec 15, 2024, she received a phone call informing her that Somnath had died of a heart attack, and she was told to go to Parbhani to collect the body. When she was near Parbhani, she was informed that the body had been shifted to the Aurangabad Govt Medical College and Hospital (GMCH). On the way, Vijayabai alleged that she was stopped by the Parbhani police and taken to the SP's office, where a senior officer told her, "We did not kill your son. He died of a heart attack. We will help you. We can offer police training to one of your sons. Take the body and go." Vijayabai said in her complaint that she refused the offer and proceeded to Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, where a postmortem was conducted on her son's body. Social activists present at the hospital informed her that the report indicated that Somnath had died of injuries caused by the police assault. In the FIR, she alleged that her son was subjected to three days of continuous assault in the lockup at New Mondha police station, and this lead to his death. She alleged that the officers and constables of the New Mondha police station were responsible for her son's death. The Supreme Court's division bench, comprising Justice M M Sundresh and Justice Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, in its order dated July 30, clarified that the Bombay HC's direction to register an FIR in the matter should be construed as a mandate to investigate the crime, not necessarily to name any specific officer unless their role is established. State govt on July 10 moved the Supreme Court against the HC order of July 4, but after three adjournments, the apex court upheld the HC's order to register an FIR. During this entire appeal period, there was no stay on the high court order that required the Parbhani police to register the FIR within a week, by July 11. On Dec 11, 2024, protests and a riot broke out in Parbhani over reports of an alleged desecration of a replica of the Indian Constitution. Somnath, a law student residing with his family in Pune and pursuing his studies at a college in Parbhani, was among the people arrested by the police in connection with the rioting case. After his initial custody remand, he was sent to jail in magisterial custody but succumbed on Dec 15, to injuries sustained in alleged police brutalities. His mother, Vijayabai Suryawanshi, filed a petition in the HC seeking registration of an FIR against the policemen responsible for the alleged brutality. On July 4, the high court, while observing in an interim order that there was "prima facie material" indicating "custodial brutality and violation of constitutional rights," directed the FIR to be registered at Mondha police station in Parbhani district within a week, by July 11. The FIR is based on a complaint application of Dec 18, 2024, by Vijayabai. Get the latest lifestyle updates on Times of India, along with Friendship Day wishes , messages and quotes !
