Juveniles above 16 years may be tried as adults for heinous crimes

Two factors needs to be considered here, reducing age is a correct step when some one involve in heinous crime, and destroying one's sanity and integrity, it is not about age, may be 70 or 16 all have done the same crime, so it should no longer be juvenile, second, some times, these juveniles hide in between their ages and many a times they are in their twenties still they show their age as under 18. There should be a definite age detection law.

It is high time these rules are brought into effect. There is a big need to do that. In fact, it is the need of the hour. I guess, only in the rape cases, the age above 16 years should be considered as adults or mature. This can bring in more strict action against the accused.

It is law of that time when a person of 18 didn't know about meaning marriage of personal relation between husband and wife. At present a young of 15 years know all thing about sex and rape. This rule is outdated.

The fact is a minor in age range 8-10 begins to learn such matters out of curiosity and with surroundings, with electronic media 'educating' younger minds encouraging newer experiments. A TV news yesterday, showed minors raped a minor girl. Now, it is necessary to punish them accordingly.

I remember a joke, where two young boys - not even teenagers - are talking about marriage and sex. One of them says, I know how children are born (and where they come from). The other retorts, I know what to do to take care that children aren't born in the first place.
This might seem a lighthearted comment, but that's pretty true in today's age.

At last the government of India is thinking of bringing in some refoms in the juvenile laws ...The question is will the Nirbhaya rapist and murderer get away because of this delay. In fact, according to reports the so called fast track courts have only caused more delays in the proceedings and something could have been done earlier so that the criminal did not get off so easily..

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Juveniles-involved-in-murder-rape-may-be-tried-as-adults/articleshow/22825155.cms?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=referral

Probably this case prompted them to make changes in this law. I think with Indian standards they have acted fast enough.

Nirbhaya case has made the law makers and law enforcing authorities sit and think. Now they have woke up to the reality and felt the immediate need to revamp the obsolete acts. Whatever may be the outcome, I'm glad a beginning has been done.

At last the government of India is thinking of bringing in some refoms in the juvenile laws ...The question is will the Nirbhaya rapist and murderer get away because of this delay. In fact, according to reports the so called fast track courts have only caused more delays in the proceedings and something could have been done earlier so that the criminal did not get off so easily..

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Juveniles-involved-in-murder-rape-may-be-tried-as-adults/articleshow/22825155.cms?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=referral

Probably this case prompted them to make changes in this law. I think with Indian standards they have acted fast enough.

Nirbhaya case has made the law makers and law enforcing authorities sit and think. Now they have woke up to the reality and felt the immediate need to revamp the obsolete acts. Whatever may be the outcome, I'm glad a beginning has been done.

But what we fail to understand is that you always miss a point. There has always to be a margin- be this age or place. Now what they will do. Reduce the age to sixteen years. Then what if one aged 15 years and nine months commits a serious crime. Then you will say reduce the age to fourteen years. Ultimately I don't know where this will lead to. The tendency to take adhoc decisions out of emotional outbursts will definitely create confusion and chaos.

At last the government of India is thinking of bringing in some refoms in the juvenile laws ...The question is will the Nirbhaya rapist and murderer get away because of this delay. In fact, according to reports the so called fast track courts have only caused more delays in the proceedings and something could have been done earlier so that the criminal did not get off so easily..

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Juveniles-involved-in-murder-rape-may-be-tried-as-adults/articleshow/22825155.cms?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=referral

Probably this case prompted them to make changes in this law. I think with Indian standards they have acted fast enough.

Nirbhaya case has made the law makers and law enforcing authorities sit and think. Now they have woke up to the reality and felt the immediate need to revamp the obsolete acts. Whatever may be the outcome, I'm glad a beginning has been done.

But what we fail to understand is that you always miss a point. There has always to be a margin- be this age or place. Now what they will do. Reduce the age to sixteen years. Then what if one aged 15 years and nine months commits a serious crime. Then you will say reduce the age to fourteen years. Ultimately I don't know where this will lead to. The tendency to take adhoc decisions out of emotional outbursts will definitely create confusion and chaos.

When they make laws they need to have provisions wherein the punishment given depends not on the age but on the gravity of the crime ...Other countries have it so why not us ? otherwise we will be going round in circles ...

It is high time these rules are brought into effect. There is a big need to do that. In fact, it is the need of the hour. I guess, only in the rape cases, the age above 16 years should be considered as adults or mature. This can bring in more strict action against the accused.

It is law of that time when a person of 18 didn't know about meaning marriage of personal relation between husband and wife. At present a young of 15 years know all thing about sex and rape. This rule is outdated.

The fact is a minor in age range 8-10 begins to learn such matters out of curiosity and with surroundings, with electronic media 'educating' younger minds encouraging newer experiments. A TV news yesterday, showed minors raped a minor girl. Now, it is necessary to punish them accordingly.

It is my opinion that every law should be reconsider after some years. In India, if some one first time trapped for speculation (Satta) and he accept in court than punishment is only 100Rs. What is value of 100 Rs. at this time

We shall have to rewrite our rule-book to suite our current needs. MOST Rules written more than 6 decades back have lost their value, especially as lawmakers are not sticking to rules themselves. We need straight forward rules without involving judiciary in complicated by-laws. That only provides benefits to mediators.

We shall have to rewrite our rule-book to suite our current needs. MOST Rules written more than 6 decades back have lost their value, especially as lawmakers are not sticking to rules themselves. We need straight forward rules without involving judiciary in complicated by-laws. That only provides benefits to mediators.

"Rule Book"? Do you mean to say the constitution of India? If that's that, then I think there have been a lot of amendments to it. And this one is going to be the most revolutionary - changing the juvenile age from 18 to 16.

We shall have to rewrite our rule-book to suite our current needs. MOST Rules written more than 6 decades back have lost their value, especially as lawmakers are not sticking to rules themselves. We need straight forward rules without involving judiciary in complicated by-laws. That only provides benefits to mediators.

"Rule Book"? Do you mean to say the constitution of India? If that's that, then I think there have been a lot of amendments to it. And this one is going to be the most revolutionary - changing the juvenile age from 18 to 16.

Yes that's right, we need a new rule book. Amendments make things only complicated. A clear set of rules, no bylaws.

We shall have to rewrite our rule-book to suite our current needs. MOST Rules written more than 6 decades back have lost their value, especially as lawmakers are not sticking to rules themselves. We need straight forward rules without involving judiciary in complicated by-laws. That only provides benefits to mediators.

"Rule Book"? Do you mean to say the constitution of India? If that's that, then I think there have been a lot of amendments to it. And this one is going to be the most revolutionary - changing the juvenile age from 18 to 16.

Yes that's right, we need a new rule book. Amendments make things only complicated. A clear set of rules, no bylaws.

That would be really impossible to think on those lines practically. An bylaws will be there. It would be hard to define things without the help of bylaws. And consitution is also a rule book, isn't it?

We shall have to rewrite our rule-book to suite our current needs. MOST Rules written more than 6 decades back have lost their value, especially as lawmakers are not sticking to rules themselves. We need straight forward rules without involving judiciary in complicated by-laws. That only provides benefits to mediators.

"Rule Book"? Do you mean to say the constitution of India? If that's that, then I think there have been a lot of amendments to it. And this one is going to be the most revolutionary - changing the juvenile age from 18 to 16.

Constitution is the main document on which are law are based. Constitution has also been amended many times. Law can always be rewritten. Since independence many new acts have been passed and old acts repealed. As regards changing juvenile age, there has always to be some age. Now you say reduce this to sixteen. supposing that some one sixteen years old does some offence, you will say reduce this to fifteen- then to fourteen and so on. I wonder where this will lead to.

We shall have to rewrite our rule-book to suite our current needs. MOST Rules written more than 6 decades back have lost their value, especially as lawmakers are not sticking to rules themselves. We need straight forward rules without involving judiciary in complicated by-laws. That only provides benefits to mediators.

"Rule Book"? Do you mean to say the constitution of India? If that's that, then I think there have been a lot of amendments to it. And this one is going to be the most revolutionary - changing the juvenile age from 18 to 16.

Constitution is the main document on which are law are based. Constitution has also been amended many times. Law can always be rewritten. Since independence many new acts have been passed and old acts repealed. As regards changing juvenile age, there has always to be some age. Now you say reduce this to sixteen. supposing that some one sixteen years old does some offence, you will say reduce this to fifteen- then to fourteen and so on. I wonder where this will lead to.

No need to take the follow up too seriously. It is going to take enough time before 18 comes to 16.eThen let there be innumerable cases when people will start talking about 15. That's still ages away.

We shall have to rewrite our rule-book to suite our current needs. MOST Rules written more than 6 decades back have lost their value, especially as lawmakers are not sticking to rules themselves. We need straight forward rules without involving judiciary in complicated by-laws. That only provides benefits to mediators.

"Rule Book"? Do you mean to say the constitution of India? If that's that, then I think there have been a lot of amendments to it. And this one is going to be the most revolutionary - changing the juvenile age from 18 to 16.

Constitution is the main document on which are law are based. Constitution has also been amended many times. Law can always be rewritten. Since independence many new acts have been passed and old acts repealed. As regards changing juvenile age, there has always to be some age. Now you say reduce this to sixteen. supposing that some one sixteen years old does some offence, you will say reduce this to fifteen- then to fourteen and so on. I wonder where this will lead to.

I think there should not be rigidity in determining juvenile age. We are living in times when explosion of knowledge and its easy accessibility are relevant factors in this regard. Persons of older generations might have been denied of opportunities to get mature at an early age and the same is not valid today.

We shall have to rewrite our rule-book to suite our current needs. MOST Rules written more than 6 decades back have lost their value, especially as lawmakers are not sticking to rules themselves. We need straight forward rules without involving judiciary in complicated by-laws. That only provides benefits to mediators.

"Rule Book"? Do you mean to say the constitution of India? If that's that, then I think there have been a lot of amendments to it. And this one is going to be the most revolutionary - changing the juvenile age from 18 to 16.

Yes that's right, we need a new rule book. Amendments make things only complicated. A clear set of rules, no bylaws.

Our constitution can be amended any nymber of times and it is necessary to do so from time to time - dont they do it in one sitting when it is a question of increasing perks for ministers and MPs? Similarly laws are made not for the government but for the people and they need to be modified depending on thecurrent situation within our society ..

We shall have to rewrite our rule-book to suite our current needs. MOST Rules written more than 6 decades back have lost their value, especially as lawmakers are not sticking to rules themselves. We need straight forward rules without involving judiciary in complicated by-laws. That only provides benefits to mediators.

"Rule Book"? Do you mean to say the constitution of India? If that's that, then I think there have been a lot of amendments to it. And this one is going to be the most revolutionary - changing the juvenile age from 18 to 16.

Yes that's right, we need a new rule book. Amendments make things only complicated. A clear set of rules, no bylaws.

Our constitution can be amended any nymber of times and it is necessary to do so from time to time - dont they do it in one sitting when it is a question of increasing perks for ministers and MPs? Similarly laws are made not for the government but for the people and they need to be modified depending on thecurrent situation within our society ..

As they get new experience, the amendments are done. It depends on what the situation is for them to do so. Newer things take place which weren't either thought of earlier or need a mention in the amendment. And yes, it never happens in one sitting as you pointed out. Its' a lengthy process.

i was surprised when I heard the judgement how can someone who was a main culprit and was just 1 month short of 18 years be escaped just for not being an adult. There should be necessary change in the law as how can a minor do such a heinous crime. :evil:

We shall have to rewrite our rule-book to suite our current needs. MOST Rules written more than 6 decades back have lost their value, especially as lawmakers are not sticking to rules themselves. We need straight forward rules without involving judiciary in complicated by-laws. That only provides benefits to mediators.

"Rule Book"? Do you mean to say the constitution of India? If that's that, then I think there have been a lot of amendments to it. And this one is going to be the most revolutionary - changing the juvenile age from 18 to 16.

Yes that's right, we need a new rule book. Amendments make things only complicated. A clear set of rules, no bylaws.

Our constitution can be amended any nymber of times and it is necessary to do so from time to time - dont they do it in one sitting when it is a question of increasing perks for ministers and MPs? Similarly laws are made not for the government but for the people and they need to be modified depending on thecurrent situation within our society ..

For raising their daily allowances, DA, facilities, perks etc. they do not have to discuss much all parties are united on that front, but here it comes to crucial issues, there are 101 excuses and there is too much rigidity in modifying or implying anything that would make a big difference.

As Chinmoy has rightly said, there are simply too many factors that have drastically changed since the time constitution came into being and several modifications have already been so what is the harm in deciding the punishment according to the circumstances in individual crimes? Why is there a need to be so rigid with respect to their age? When a person 17 years old can cold-bloodedly carry out a heinous crime, does his age remain so important a consideration?

We shall have to rewrite our rule-book to suite our current needs. MOST Rules written more than 6 decades back have lost their value, especially as lawmakers are not sticking to rules themselves. We need straight forward rules without involving judiciary in complicated by-laws. That only provides benefits to mediators.

"Rule Book"? Do you mean to say the constitution of India? If that's that, then I think there have been a lot of amendments to it. And this one is going to be the most revolutionary - changing the juvenile age from 18 to 16.

Yes that's right, we need a new rule book. Amendments make things only complicated. A clear set of rules, no bylaws.

Our constitution can be amended any nymber of times and it is necessary to do so from time to time - dont they do it in one sitting when it is a question of increasing perks for ministers and MPs? Similarly laws are made not for the government but for the people and they need to be modified depending on thecurrent situation within our society ..

As they get new experience, the amendments are done. It depends on what the situation is for them to do so. Newer things take place which weren't either thought of earlier or need a mention in the amendment. And yes, it never happens in one sitting as you pointed out. Its' a lengthy process.

You probably got confused about what I meant, the last time the DA increase for ministers and MPs took one sitting only and since there is a very obvious consesnsus it got passed immediately ! they know how to look after their personal interests ..

We shall have to rewrite our rule-book to suite our current needs. MOST Rules written more than 6 decades back have lost their value, especially as lawmakers are not sticking to rules themselves. We need straight forward rules without involving judiciary in complicated by-laws. That only provides benefits to mediators.

"Rule Book"? Do you mean to say the constitution of India? If that's that, then I think there have been a lot of amendments to it. And this one is going to be the most revolutionary - changing the juvenile age from 18 to 16.

Yes that's right, we need a new rule book. Amendments make things only complicated. A clear set of rules, no bylaws.

Our constitution can be amended any nymber of times and it is necessary to do so from time to time - dont they do it in one sitting when it is a question of increasing perks for ministers and MPs? Similarly laws are made not for the government but for the people and they need to be modified depending on thecurrent situation within our society ..

That's very true! Laws are meant to meet the expectations and needs of society at any given point and it has been evolving and developing since the time immemorial. It is by no means static in nature. Thus we can observe many customs, conventions which formed the core of many a legislation have been accepted or discarded to meet the demands of time.

At last the government of India is thinking of bringing in some refoms in the juvenile laws ...The question is will the Nirbhaya rapist and murderer get away because of this delay. In fact, according to reports the so called fast track courts have only caused more delays in the proceedings and something could have been done earlier so that the criminal did not get off so easily..

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Juveniles-involved-in-murder-rape-may-be-tried-as-adults/articleshow/22825155.cms?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=referral

Probably this case prompted them to make changes in this law. I think with Indian standards they have acted fast enough.

Nirbhaya case has made the law makers and law enforcing authorities sit and think. Now they have woke up to the reality and felt the immediate need to revamp the obsolete acts. Whatever may be the outcome, I'm glad a beginning has been done.

But what we fail to understand is that you always miss a point. There has always to be a margin- be this age or place. Now what they will do. Reduce the age to sixteen years. Then what if one aged 15 years and nine months commits a serious crime. Then you will say reduce the age to fourteen years. Ultimately I don't know where this will lead to. The tendency to take adhoc decisions out of emotional outbursts will definitely create confusion and chaos.

When they make laws they need to have provisions wherein the punishment given depends not on the age but on the gravity of the crime ...Other countries have it so why not us ? otherwise we will be going round in circles ...

Thus does this not prove that crime is crime and denying the crime and punishment too counted as crime?