NEW DELHI: Rajya Sabha passed the much-expected new Juvenile Justice Bill against the backdrop of the 2012 gangrape-cum-murder. After passage of Juvenile Justice Bill, law will try offenders who are 16 & above as adults in heinous crimes such as rape & murder cases.
The government seeking support of all the parties to the legislation to "deter many other boys" from doing such a crime.
Several parties, including NCP, CPI(M) and DMK, pushed for sending the bill to a Select Committee, arguing that further examination was required to decide whether the age for punitive action should be reduced to 16 years from the current level of 18 years.
Moving the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Bill for consideration and passage, Women and Child Development Minister Maneka Gandhi today said the legislation is "compassionate" and comprehensive in nature.
She said the juvenile crime is the fastest rising segment of the crime and "You cannot have a more comprehensive, more nuanced and compassionate Bill."
Reaching out to the main opposition, she reminded the Congress that the Bill was theirs and not hers or the NDA government.
"We may not be able to do anything about the juvenile convict in the Nirbhaya case but we can deter many other boys from doing so," she pleaded.
The bill was taken up against the backdrop of uproar over release of juvenile convict in the heinous gangrape-cum-murder of a 23-year-old girl on December 16, 2012. Parents of the victim have said that the convict could escape after spending three years in a correction home only because the law is weak.
Explaining the nuances of the bill, the Minister said no juvenile will be sent to the jail directly.
She said the Justice Board has experts and psycologists who will first decide whether the crime committed has been "child-like" or was it committed in an "adult frame of mind".
Gandhi said the juveniles will still have the power to appeal even if a court decides that they will go to an adult jail.
"If juvenile is sent to jail, they will be sent to a borstal until they are 21 years old, after which there will be a review," she said making it clear that they will still not be spending time with hardened criminals.
"This is a very nuanced bill... some people are over simplifying this bill. If it is perceived that it was a thought-out, adult and planned crime, it would not be considered a child-like crime", the Minister said.
Referring to media reports that the convict in the December 2012 gangrape-cum-murder was radicalized in remand home, Gandhi asked what exactly were Kashmiri terrorists doing in a children's home in the same place as a juvenile convicted of rape.
Asking whether victims should be protected or the rapists, she said it was important to pass the Juvenile Justice Bill because of the seriousness of the crimes committed by some juveniles.
After Gandhi finished speaking, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Venkaiah Naidu reminded the House that the government had listed the Bill thrice this session and a number of times during the last session.
He said there was unnecessary discussion that the government was shy of bringing in the Juvenile Justice Bill.
He stressed that the Bill cannot be applied in retrospective effect.
Leader of Opposition Ghulam Nabi Azad, who initiated the discussion on the Bill, took a dig at Naidu, saying even when the House was running smoothly, he was taking "panga".
Azad said as the Health Minister in 2012, he had taken every possible step to save the girl, including sending her for treatment, "but the prayers of crores of people and the capability of best doctors could not save her in the end".
He said it was a shame for the society that such rapes happen even when we say the country is developing and Indian girls go to foreign universities and are excelling.
Taking a dig at the government, Azad said when the Juvenile law was first enacted by the Rajiv Gandhi dispensation, the cutoff age was 16. "This was subsequently raised to 18 during the NDA government is 2000 and now they want to come back to the age that Rajiv Gandhi had set in 1986," he said.
He said for the last few days, the country has been discussing the issue and the biggest question is about the age. But, from politicians to writers, everyone is divided on the issue and many good arguments can be put forward in support of as well as against the cut off age of 16.
Had the juvenile convict in Nirbhaya case not been released, the government would not have been serious about the Bill, he said.
Azad said there should be separate facility for those juveniles who are sent to jail and they should not be put up with hardened criminals.
"It should not be that instead of stopping crimes, more criminals are born," he said reminding the House that children at that age have a tender mind.
"Criminals and terrorists misuse the law and get crimes committed by juveniles because they feel that they can escape the law," he said.
Azad said the Juvenile Justice Board should be more broad based and that there should be special classes for those who are sent to jail so that they do not feel that their life has ended.
He said most of the juvenile children hail from poor family background and do not belong to the rich and well settled.
He strongly pitched for lighting of dingy lanes in the cities and said that police patrols should be increased as it will act as a deterrent.
He said the police should patrol not only the New Delhi area where Ministers live but also other parts of the city.
Ravi Prakash Verma (Samajwadi Party) said piecemeal remedy will not work and reminded the government that tougher laws enacted in the past have failed to check the crime from happening again.
He said most of juveniles do not even know what the consequences of their act would be. Children are also being exploited by organised gangs, he added.
Verma also attacked the media for only focussing on the Nirbhaya case even when such incidents have happened across the country.
Anu Aga (Nominated) demanded that the Bill be referred to a Select Committee for examination as lowering the age of a juvenile from 18 years to 16 years will be a step in backward direction and would be considered a knee-jerk reaction only.
Most children dread going to remand homes due to brutalities done there, she said.
Kahkashan Perween (JDU) said the legislation should focus on converting inefficient remand home reform system into an effective system to reform children and should not focus merely on lowering the age of the juvenile.
Perween said most of the juveniles have the background of illiteracy, unemployment and poverty and emphasis should be on their betterment in remand homes.
If need be, the stay of the juvenile can be extended in the remand home for reforms.
A Navaneethakrishnan (AIADMK) said there is a need to protect the children and demanded that the bill should have provisions for legal rights for juvenile, the victims and parents of victims.