Subject of an intense debate for the past few weeks, then a juvenile (now over 20 years) and involved in December16, 2012 gangrape case in the national Capital, will be released on Sunday.
The High Court refused to intervene in the matter stating that ‘the most stringent of the orders that can be passed under the rules is directing the juvenile to be sent to a Special Home for a maximum period of three years’.
“The legal issues raised in the main writ petition, i.e., the need for ascertaining the factum of reformation of the juveniles in conflict with law before they are released from the Special Home on expiry of the period of stay ordered by the Juvenile Justice Board is a larger issue of public importance and requires deeper consideration,” the Bench of Justice G Rohini and Justice Jayant Nath said.
The development has taken place despite BJP leader Subramanain Swamy seeking a stay on the release of the juvenile convict, stating that the juvenile continues to be unreformed and has become radicalised during his stay at juvenile home after coming in contact with another juvenile convicted for his involvement in Delhi High Court.
Swamy also stated that the convict cannot be released until it is demonstrably assured that he has reformed during his stay in Special Home. He further sought an interim direction to continue the incarceration of the convict.
The counsel appearing for the convict stated that after the juvenile turned into an adult, he has been regularly counselled by the counsellors of Mental Health Unit. The details of the vocational skills imparted to him were also presented to the court.
Swamy further sought for the extension for the convict’s juvenile care as there is no material to establish the mental state of the juvenile.
JJ Board had sentenced the juvenile to three years detention in reformation home. In the petition, Swamy contended that “no provision has been made in the Act, to provide for vicious unregenerate convicted juveniles who despite having undergone the reformation process for the maximum penalty of three years custody in a special home, continue to be a menace to the society”...
“The question arises, in a very acute form, in the instant gangrape case, where the respondent no.1 (juvenile), one of the offenders, who was adjudged to be under eighteen years of age at the time of the offence, is about to complete the maximum period of the offence prescribed....,” the plea had said.