SC rejects plea to lower juvenile age

The Supreme Court on Wednesday turned down a plea to reduce the age of a juvenile delinquent from existing 18 to 16 years saying it has been fixed after much deliberation. The apex court said the essence of juvenile law was restorative and not retributive.

A three-judge bench presided over by Chief Justice Altamas Kabir dismissed a bunch of PILs challenging the definition of a juvenile as provided under Section 2(k) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000.

“There are, of course, exceptions where a child in the age group of 16 to 18 may have developed criminal propensities, which would make it virtually impossible for him/her to be reintegrated into mainstream society, but such examples are not of such proportions as to warrant any change in thinking, since it is probably better to try and re-integrate children with criminal propensities into mainstream society, rather than to allow them to develop into hardened criminals, which does not augur well for the future,” the bench said.

A number of PILs were filed after the December 16 Delhi gang-rape case involving a 17-year-old and others. They urged the court to bring down the age of juvenility and consider the model of awarding punishment depending upon the severity of the offence. Holding that the December 16 incident was “an aberration rather than a rule”, the court, however, said that the Act was based on sound principles recognised internationally and contained in the provisions of the Indian Constitution.

“It would not be wise on to deviate from the provisions of the Act, which represented the collective wisdom of Parliament,” the court said.

The bench also comprising Justices S S Nijjar and J Chelameswar, also noted as per the Crimes Record Bureau, the number of crimes committed by juveniles was about 2 per cent of the country’s crime rate.

It also said the committee appointed to review the amendments to the criminal law, headed by former CJI J S Verma, in its report submitted on January 23, 2013, did not recommend the reduction in the age of juveniles in conflict with law.