SC dismisses pleas on fresh interpretation of term 'juvenile'

Says there is no unconstitutionality for fixing upto 18 years of age for the offenders to be tried under the Juvenile Justice Act

The Supreme Court today dismissed pleas seeking fresh interpretation of the term 'juvenile' in the statute and leaving it to the criminal court, instead of Juvenile Justice Board, to determine the juvenility of an offender in heinous crimes.

A bench of Chief Justice P Sathasivam, justices Ranjan Gogoi and Shiv Kirti Singh rejected the two petitions, filed by BJP leader Subramanian Swamy and parents of the December 16 gangrape victim, challenging the constitutional validity of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2000.

The bench dismissed the plea of victim's parents for sending the juvenile convict in the brutal gangrape and murder case to face trial in regular court, saying there was no question of sending him to face regular trial.

It said that there is no unconstitutionality for fixing upto 18 years of age for the offenders to be tried under the Juvenile Justice Act.

During the proceedings earlier, the two petitions were opposed by the Centre.

The victim's father had said that the August 31, 2013 verdict of the Juvenile Justice Board was not acceptable to the family and so they challenged the Act as there was no other authority which they could approach for such relief.

He had sought a direction to declare as unconstitutional and void the JJA to the extent it puts a blanket ban on the power of the criminal courts to try a juvenile offender for offences committed under IPC.

His counsel had said "mental and intellectual maturity" of the juvenile involved in the December 16 gangrape has to be taken into account and should be put to trial like the four other accused who have been awarded death sentence.