LexSALIL BALI versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B [2013) 13 S.C.R. 1020 SAUL BALI v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR. (Writ Petition (C) No. 10 OF 2013) JULY 17, 2013 [ALTAMAS KABIR, CJI, SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR AND J. CHELAMESWAR, JJ.] Juvenile Justice (Protection and Care of Children) Act, C 2000 - s. 2(k) and (/) and s. 15 - Provisions under - Need to strike down - In view of the fact that criminal offences committed by persons within range of 16 to 18 years are on rise - Held: The Act as amended in 2006, and the Rules framed thereunder are based on sound principles D recognized internationally and contained in the provisions "' ~ of the Constitution - As per the reports of the Crimes Record Bureau, the number of crimes committed by juveniles comes to only about 2% of the country's crime rate - In the recent years there has been spurt in criminal activities by adults E and not by juveniles - In absence of proper data, it would not be wise to deviate from the provisions of the Act, which represent collective wisdom of Parliament - Juvenile Justiee (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007. "'- .... Present petitions were filed seeking re- F consideration of s. 2(k), 2(1) and 15 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, in the light of spurt in criminal offences being committed by persons within the range of 16 to 18 years, such as the gang rape inside a moving vehicle on 16 December, ,,. ' G 2012, wherein alongwith others, a juvenile, who had attained the age of 17% years was being tried separately under the provisions of 2000 Act. The petitioners prayed for striking down the provisions of s. 2(k) and 2(1) of the Act; and to bring the Act in conformity with the H provisions of the Constit~1dmD and to direct the Central f •• )> SAUL BALI v. UNION OF INDIA 1021 Government to make changes in the Act, to bring it in A line with the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for administration of Juvenile Justice. Dismissing the petitions, the Court HELD: 1. There is a definite thought process, which went into the enactment of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, and the Rules subsequently framed thereunder in 2007. It cannot be questioned that children are amongst the most vulnerable sections in any society. They represent almost one-third of the world's population, and unless C they are provided with proper opportunities, the opportunity of making them grow into responsible citizens of tomorrow will slip out of the hands of the present generation. [Paras 40 and 41] [1045-G, H; 1046- A-B] D B 2. India developed its own jurisprudence relating to children and the recognition of their rights. With the adoption of the Constitution on 26th November 1949, constitutional safeguards, as far as weaker sections of E the society, including children, were provided for. The Constitution has guaranteed several rights to children, such as equality before the_ law, free and compulsory primary education to children between the age group of six to fourteen years, prohibition of trafficking and forced labour of children and prohibition of employment F of children below the age of fourteen years in factories, mines or hazardous occupations. The Constitution enables the State Governments to make special provisions for children. To prevent female foeticide, the. Pre-conception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques G (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act was enacted in 1994. One of the latest enactments by Parliament is the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. [Para 43] [1047-D-G] H 1022 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2013] 13 S.C.R. A 3. The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, is in tune with the provisions of the Constitution and the various Declarations and Conventions adopted by the world community represented by the United Nations. The basis of fixing 8 of the age till when a person could be treated as a child at eighteen years in the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, was Article 1 of the Convention of the Rights of the Child. The description in Article 1 of th~ Convention was a contradiction in C terms. While generally treating eighteen to be the age till which a person could be treated to be a child, it also indicates that the same was variable where national laws recognize the age of majority earlier. In this regard, one of the other considerations which weighed with the legis
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.