18 July, 2013


The 'Minor' Gang-rapist, the real kingpin of the Delhi / Nirbhaya Gangrape will walk a free man in just about two years because
a. when he raped her he was a few months short of 18 yrs
b. the law doesn't punish minors with a sentence stiffer than three year's in jail [remand home, actually] Now, law is law. But law must change. Yes, it cannot be changed retrospectively. But shouldn't we be worried for the future Nirbhayas? 18 was the age when it was thought once upon a time that the young knew it all, and took responsibility for their conduct. Can we deny that - thanks to the influx of information and communication technology - a child of 13 knows it all now? Puberty is now actually attained much earlier.
 Children aged between 16-18 have committed an overwhelmingly large number of rapes during 2010-2012 in Tamilnadu, Odhisha, MP, UP and Delhi. I dare say that punishment must go hand in hand with the crime, and not with the age. If a child can rape, he knows it. And must be so dealt. It is not quite like holding him accountable for gullibility or financial misdemeanor. Hence the question: Should the age of majority be reduced from 18 to 16?

Should the Parliament amend the extant laws reducing this age?  

No comments:

Post a Comment