lower juvenile age for sex offenders
The Union Government must waste no time in implementing the recommendation of the parliamentary panel on women's empowerment that the age bar for juvenile male sex offenders be reduced from 18 to 16 years. The suggestion has been made on the basis of the fact that crimes the juveniles commit, especially against women, have consistently been on the rise. Between 2010 and 2011 alone, the figure rose by more than 10 per cent. Juveniles were found to be involved in 1,149 cases of rape and 573 cases of molestation in 2011, up from 858 cases of rape and 536 cases of molestation the previous year. Also, as the panel's report pointed out, most of these crimes were committed by juveniles who were on the brink of adulthood. The only way to curtail this trend is to ensure that the guilty get the punishment they deserve. Under the present laws, this is far from the case. This has been evident recently in the December 16 Delhi gang rape case, in which one of the six accused is a juvenile. He is currently being tried before the Juvenile Justice Board and, if convicted, the maximum sentence that he can be given is three years in a juvenile home. His co-accused, on the other hand, face the death penalty. Yet, all that separates the juvenile from the rest of the men is that he was six months short of attaining legal maturity at the time of the crime. This did not make his crime any less brutal — in fact, according to police records, he was the most vicious of the lot. That he will nevertheless get away with the lightest sentence is a mockery of justice.
Those opposing the suggested lowering of the age bar to 16 years have argued that 18 years is the international norm for adulthood and India should abide by it. They have also voiced concerns that such a change in the laws might set in motion a dangerous trend of treating children who commit crimes at par with adult perpetrators. While both arguments are well-taken, they must be viewed in context. First, the proposal does not extend to all under-18 criminals but covers only those that are convicted of grave sexual offences. So, a teenage pick-pocket will not face years in prison in the company of hardened criminals. Second, the world over, laws are introduced and then modified in response to the changing mores of society. For example, the US is currently debating whether to remove convicted juveniles from the country's sex offender's registry. There are strong arguments on both sides of the debate but ultimately, it is the threat that such juveniles pose to society that will determine their fate. In India, the numbers to make that decision are already available and, therefore, there is no reason why the laws should not be reformed in keeping with the situation prevailing here.