The issue assumes significance in the wake of gangrape and assault of a 23-year-old girl here on December 16 in a moving bus as the charge sheet filed by the Delhi Police in a fast track court has mentioned that a 17-year-and-seven month minor, who was among the six accused in the case, was most brutal.
The apex court sought the assistance of Attorney General G E Vahanvati to examine the issues raised in the petition which also sought striking down of the definition of juvenile from the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act.
"We have to examine the matter," a bench comprising justices K S Radhakrishnan and Dipak Misra said while adding that "the matter is relating to fixation of age".
"It is a question of law," it said and added that "the fixation of age should have some nexus with the gravity of the crime or offence" for deciding whether the offenders can be tried as adults in heinous offences.
The bench asked the Attorney General to file counter affidavits and relevant reports relating to the issue on behalf of the Ministry of Law and Ministry of Home Affairs by March 29 and decided to hear the matter from April 3.
The petition, filed by two advocates--Kamal Kumar Pandey and Sukumar--contended that sections 2(L), 10 and 17 of the JJ Act which deals with the issue were irrational, arbitrary, without reasonable nexus and thereby ultravires and unconstitutional.
The Attorney General, who was asked to assist the court, said the Justice J S Verma committee report has gone into all the issues but refrained from lowering the age for making a classification for juvenile.
However, the bench said it will not go into the Justice Verma Committee report as the issue before it was purely a matter of law. More
