The Supreme Court has acquitted a rape accused after it was found that he was a juvenile at the time of the incident. A bench led by justice NV Ramana ordered his release Friday after a report said the juvenile had already spent six years in prison.
The top court set aside an eight-year-old Punjab and Haryana high court order that convicted the juvenile and two others for gang rape of a 15-year-old girl. Since the incident dates back to September 2000, the Supreme Court decided the case as per provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000. Under the law, the maximum period for which a juvenile can be sent to a special home is only three years.
The HC had rejected the contention of the juvenile that he was aged less than 18 years at the time of commission of the offence. In support of his argument before the SC, the juvenile produced school certificates following which the top court ordered an inquiry by the registrar (judicial). The inquiry found that the juvenile was aged 16 years, 2 months and 2 days at the time of commission of the offence.
“We do not have any doubt that the inquiry conducted by the Registrar (Judicial) upon the direction of this Court in the instant matter amounts to an inquiry conducted by this Court itself, and is conclusive proof of the age of the Appellant as provided in Rule 12(3) of the 2007 Rules,” the court said.
{{/usCountry}}“We do not have any doubt that the inquiry conducted by the Registrar (Judicial) upon the direction of this Court in the instant matter amounts to an inquiry conducted by this Court itself, and is conclusive proof of the age of the Appellant as provided in Rule 12(3) of the 2007 Rules,” the court said.
{{/usCountry}}It even rejected the state’s argument that an inquiry by the registrar cannot be given precedence over the HC finding.
“Seeing that the Registrar (Judicial) is a District Judge serving on deputation at the Supreme Court, recourse to his or her assistance in the form of collecting evidence and arriving at a finding regarding the claim of juvenility of the person concerned may be undertaken by this Court in order to save its judicial time,” the court said.