The juvenile convict in the Delhi gang-rape was sentenced to three years in reform home
Days away from what will be a year after a young paramedic was gang-raped on a bus in the capital, the government wants to make a change in the law - a change that will no longer allow juveniles accused of heinous crimes to get protection under the juvenile justice act.
Under the new proposed amendment, the Juvenile Justice board will decide whether a juvenile above 16 years, accused of a heinous crime like rape, murder or acid attacks, can be tried in a regular criminal court like an adult. The Board will have month to decide this based on a social investigation report and maturity of the teenager.
In case of repeat offenders, the definition of heinous crimes is proposed to be broadened to include offences like attempt to murder, dacoity, kidnapping and outraging the modesty of a woman. The only rider, keeping in mind International treaties India is committed to, will be that juveniles above 16 years would not be sentenced to life imprisonment or given capital punishment.
The government feels it has the numbers to back its proposal. In the last decade, between 2002 to 2012, the number of juveniles accused of murder has jumped by 86 per cent from 531 cases to 990 last year. Cases involving juveniles accused of rape have shot up from 495 to 1175, a phenomenal 142 per cent increase.
The minister for Women and Child Development, Krishna Tirath said, "After last year's case of Nirbhaya, there was tremendous outrage among people. Many felt that the three year maximum punishment for the juvenile accused was not enough given the seriousness of his crime. We are not lowering the age of juveniles."
At the moment, it's still an idea that's awaiting feedback from both the Law and Home ministries, but it's already rekindled the debate over juveniles in conflict with the law.
Though the government says it has consulted a large number of NGOs and agencies on the proposed changes, child rights activists offer a note of caution. Enakshi Ganguly, co-Director of HAQ, Centre for Child Rights says, "The government has not consulted anyone before it has come up with this, which is very worrisome. Here, we are using the argument of maturity. How will we decide maturity? Who determines seriousness of crime? Where is it defined? These are very large big questions. And unless these are very well thought out we are going to go in for yet another knee jerk, adhoc law change."