Leniency under Juvenile Justice Act emboldening Juveniles to commit heinous crimes: Supreme Court in Kathua rape case

Leniency afforded to juveniles under the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 is emboldening many juveniles to indulge in heinous crimes, the Supreme Court observed on Wednesday [UT of Jammu & Kashmir and ors vs Shubham Sangra]. .A bench of Justices Ajay Rastogi and JB Pardiwala said that the manner in which many crimes have been committed over a period of time by the juveniles and still continue to be committed, makes it wonder whether the government should rethink the framework under the Juvenile Justice Act."We have started gathering an impression that the leniency with which the juveniles are dealt with in the name of goal of reformation is making them more and more emboldened in indulging in such heinous crimes. It is for the government to consider whether its enactment of 2015 has proved to be effective or something still needs to be done in the matter before it is too late in the day," the Court said.The rising rate of juvenile delinquency in India is a matter of concern and requires immediate attention, the bench added. "There is a school of thought, existing in our country that firmly believes that howsoever heinous the crime may be, be it single rape, gangrape, drug peddling or murder but if the accused is a juvenile, he should be dealt with keeping in mind only one thing i.e., the goal of reformation. The school of thought, we are taking about believes that the goal of reformation is ideal. The manner, in which brutal and heinous crimes have been committed over a period of time by the juveniles and still continue to be committed, makes us wonder whether the Act, 2015 has sub served its object," the Court observed.The observations were made in a judgment relating to the dispute over the age of one of the accused in the Kathua rape and murder case, Shubam Sangra.The case pertains to the rape and murder of an 8-year-old child belonging to the nomadic Bakerwal community. The victim was found dead on January 17, 2018. Owing to the sensitivity of the case, the Supreme Court had in May 2018, transferred the trial to Pathankot.The trial court in Pathankot had convicted 6 out of the 7 accused in the case and acquitted one, giving him the benefit of the doubt. Sangra, however, was being tried before Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) when his age came into dispute. The Jammu and Kashmir High Court had affirmed an order of the trial court which found Sangra to be a juvenile.The Supreme Court had, however, stayed those proceedings before the JJB in February 2020 after J&K moved the present plea..The Supreme Court in its judgment today ruled that Sangra should be tried as an adult and not a juvenile..In its judgment, the top court noted that there was no conclusive evidence to prove that Sangra was a juvenile barring medical expert's opinion. It further said that when an accused commits a heinous and grave crime, attempts are made to take the statutory shelter under the guise of being a minor."A casual or cavalier approach while recording as to whether an accused is a juvenile or not cannot be permitted as the courts are enjoined upon to perform their duties with the object of protecting the confidence of a common man in the institution entrusted with the administration of justice," the Court said..The Court further ruled that a medical expert’s estimate of age may not be a statutory substitute for proof and is only an opinion."But such opinion of an expert should not be brushed aside or ignored when the Court itself is in doubt in regard to the age of a citizen claiming constitutional protection," the judgment said.In the absence of all other acceptable materials, if such opinion of the expert points to a reasonable possibility regarding range of his age, the Court must consider the same in the interest of justice, the apex court underlined..Advocate Nitin Sangra appeared for the accused. Senior Advocate PS Patwalia appeared for the Union Territory..[Read Judgment]