Seriously, just 3 years, are you kidding me! Indian law system has to change. Whether minor or adult, the suffering was same, then why only 3 years punishment, why not hanged till death??? People please take action!

This punishment is ridiculous. As good as allowing the juvenile to roam scotfree after such a lengthy proceedings. No wonder the dissatisfied members of the family decided to challenge JJB's order.

Thr minors are treated differently. This is for sufficient well thought reasons. The 'Nirbhaya case' justifies stricter punishment even to the minor but law cannot be changed for a single case. Hence he gets benefit of the law. Nobody can help this.

True.A law or policy is not cast in the stone. In tune with the changing times and the ever changing modes of crime, I think constitutional experts can think of change in the juvenile law.

They are already reviewing the law. Supreme Court is also hearing the plea for changes in juvenile law. But the law will not be changed retrospectively and hence the minor accused in the gang rape case gets benefit of his age of minority.

The law if it's changed need not have retrospective effect . Contemplating to change the law itself is a great thing.

If they had any sense they should have thought of it soon after the gang rape case ,once they realised how a minor is taking advantage of the law and getting away with rape and murder ! As usual, everything about this country is slow paced and thats what encourages the criminals to go on commiting such heinous crimes..

The law is framed according to normal conditions and not exceptional cases. There is no need to hurry change in law just because of a single case. It cannot be a case whenever something grave occurs, law be amended. In this case, hearing on the issue of juvenile age continues in supreme Court. A verdict or suggestion for change in law can materialize after due deliberation and not in hurry. Taking fast decision through fast track is okay but not hasty change in law. If we were to adopt this hurry, better give a good bye to democracy, law and courts and follow old monarchy system and let decisions be in whimsical manner. .

I may add that the consideration of an individual's minority status is based on the belief that a minor is incapable of taking any sane decision. That is why a minor is neither given job nor allowed to make any contract. A lunatic is also not capable of contracting and is considered not responsible for any crime. Thus the main basis for punishment is culpable state of mind. If there are too many cases of such crimes by minors, there is need to change law. It is not advisable to change law just because of one incident.

The problem is with our law where there is no provision for a change when it is necessary like there is in other countries.That is being sensible and we are stuck with our stick in the mud attitude, no wonder the country is moving backwards in every respect ...

Peoples are disappointed with this decision. Only 2 years and 8 month in reformatory. At the time rape his age was 17 years 6 month 11 days.

The experts favor lesser punishment to the juvenile which is in fact maximum punishment that could be given. Child rights activists are also not in favoring of lowering the juvenile age. In fact they maintain that strict compliance with juvenile law will reduce offenses by juveniles.

http://www.dnaindia.com/india/1882875/report-rpn-singh-says-verdict-in-delhi-gang-rape-case-as-per-law

http://www.firstpost.com/india/why-experts-have-defended-3-year-term-for-juvenile-offender-in-delhi-gangrape-1075935.html

In such matters, mere public outcry cannot decide issue. If done so, we shall return to barbarism and anarchy which will be far worse than what we may even imagine.

Seriously, just 3 years, are you kidding me! Indian law system has to change. Whether minor or adult, the suffering was same, then why only 3 years punishment, why not hanged till death??? People please take action!

This punishment is ridiculous. As good as allowing the juvenile to roam scotfree after such a lengthy proceedings. No wonder the dissatisfied members of the family decided to challenge JJB's order.

Thr minors are treated differently. This is for sufficient well thought reasons. The 'Nirbhaya case' justifies stricter punishment even to the minor but law cannot be changed for a single case. Hence he gets benefit of the law. Nobody can help this.

True.A law or policy is not cast in the stone. In tune with the changing times and the ever changing modes of crime, I think constitutional experts can think of change in the juvenile law.

They are already reviewing the law. Supreme Court is also hearing the plea for changes in juvenile law. But the law will not be changed retrospectively and hence the minor accused in the gang rape case gets benefit of his age of minority.

The law if it's changed need not have retrospective effect . Contemplating to change the law itself is a great thing.

If they had any sense they should have thought of it soon after the gang rape case ,once they realised how a minor is taking advantage of the law and getting away with rape and murder ! As usual, everything about this country is slow paced and thats what encourages the criminals to go on commiting such heinous crimes..

The law is framed according to normal conditions and not exceptional cases. There is no need to hurry change in law just because of a single case. It cannot be a case whenever something grave occurs, law be amended. In this case, hearing on the issue of juvenile age continues in supreme Court. A verdict or suggestion for change in law can materialize after due deliberation and not in hurry. Taking fast decision through fast track is okay but not hasty change in law. If we were to adopt this hurry, better give a good bye to democracy, law and courts and follow old monarchy system and let decisions be in whimsical manner. .

I may add that the consideration of an individual's minority status is based on the belief that a minor is incapable of taking any sane decision. That is why a minor is neither given job nor allowed to make any contract. A lunatic is also not capable of contracting and is considered not responsible for any crime. Thus the main basis for punishment is culpable state of mind. If there are too many cases of such crimes by minors, there is need to change law. It is not advisable to change law just because of one incident.

I agree but some cases need to be tackled on urgent basis also and that is where we found wanted seriously. This was right time to act faster and occasion to rise to tackle problem once for ever.

Seriously, just 3 years, are you kidding me! Indian law system has to change. Whether minor or adult, the suffering was same, then why only 3 years punishment, why not hanged till death??? People please take action!

This punishment is ridiculous. As good as allowing the juvenile to roam scotfree after such a lengthy proceedings. No wonder the dissatisfied members of the family decided to challenge JJB's order.

Thr minors are treated differently. This is for sufficient well thought reasons. The 'Nirbhaya case' justifies stricter punishment even to the minor but law cannot be changed for a single case. Hence he gets benefit of the law. Nobody can help this.

True.A law or policy is not cast in the stone. In tune with the changing times and the ever changing modes of crime, I think constitutional experts can think of change in the juvenile law.

They are already reviewing the law. Supreme Court is also hearing the plea for changes in juvenile law. But the law will not be changed retrospectively and hence the minor accused in the gang rape case gets benefit of his age of minority.

The law if it's changed need not have retrospective effect . Contemplating to change the law itself is a great thing.

If they had any sense they should have thought of it soon after the gang rape case ,once they realised how a minor is taking advantage of the law and getting away with rape and murder ! As usual, everything about this country is slow paced and thats what encourages the criminals to go on commiting such heinous crimes..

The law is framed according to normal conditions and not exceptional cases. There is no need to hurry change in law just because of a single case. It cannot be a case whenever something grave occurs, law be amended. In this case, hearing on the issue of juvenile age continues in supreme Court. A verdict or suggestion for change in law can materialize after due deliberation and not in hurry. Taking fast decision through fast track is okay but not hasty change in law. If we were to adopt this hurry, better give a good bye to democracy, law and courts and follow old monarchy system and let decisions be in whimsical manner. .

I may add that the consideration of an individual's minority status is based on the belief that a minor is incapable of taking any sane decision. That is why a minor is neither given job nor allowed to make any contract. A lunatic is also not capable of contracting and is considered not responsible for any crime. Thus the main basis for punishment is culpable state of mind. If there are too many cases of such crimes by minors, there is need to change law. It is not advisable to change law just because of one incident.

I agree but some cases need to be tackled on urgent basis also and that is where we found wanted seriously. This was right time to act faster and occasion to rise to tackle problem once for ever.

Unless there are checks and balances any law becomes useless since it is not in the interest of the public....In a case like this what has happened is taking full advantage of the so called Juvenile law when everyone concerned including the activists know that the fellow is a dangerous cxriminal capable of much more whn he comes out in six months time.So one now has to hope that he doesnt strike on any of us when he is back.On second thoughts if he had done such a deed on say one of the activist's daughter or a ministers daughter would they let him get away...They would have immediately brought in amendments to the juvenile law and fast tracked the proceedings for sure ! the usual double standards !

Sonia Gandhi has rightly stated that law can by itself protect women. Even if you make law for death sentence for just eve teasing, there is no guarantee that such crimes will stop. As a matter of fact stricter the law, there will be exaggerated stress on virginity and women will suffer by being confined to homes. They may not get even employment as the employers will be scary of women. Colleges and schools may avoid girls.

What really happens. There are various ways to look at an issue. The NGO pertaining to women want protection of women even against fifteen years old boy. The child right groups want protection of juveniles. Thus there comes conflict between women rights and child rights groups. If you make law lenient, there is demand for strict law. If the law is harsh, human rights groups jump in. It is necessary to take holistic view of issues and not jump to hasty decisions. This is like blow hot blow cold. Govt. and judiciary cannot work on sentiments only- which are often bizarre and impracticable.

Sonia Gandhi has rightly stated that law can by itself protect women. Even if you make law for death sentence for just eve teasing, there is no guarantee that such crimes will stop. As a matter of fact stricter the law, there will be exaggerated stress on virginity and women will suffer by being confined to homes. They may not get even employment as the employers will be scary of women. Colleges and schools may avoid girls.

What really happens. There are various ways to look at an issue. The NGO pertaining to women want protection of women even against fifteen years old boy. The child right groups want protection of juveniles. Thus there comes conflict between women rights and child rights groups. If you make law lenient, there is demand for strict law. If the law is harsh, human rights groups jump in. It is necessary to take holistic view of issues and not jump to hasty decisions. This is like blow hot blow cold. Govt. and judiciary cannot work on sentiments only- which are often bizarre and impracticable.

So , Sonia Gandhi has agreed that her government is inacapable of giving protection to her citizens, and how can they since more than half the police is guarding her own party and other politicians,probably 10% for her family use .... Have they even looked at the issue of providing more staff , cutting their own and also employing more if needed , probably cutting down on some of their foreign trips and other merry making ...it is very easy for Madame Sonia to sit where she is and sermonise knowing that her own kith and kin are well protected...

Sonia Gandhi has rightly stated that law can by itself protect women. Even if you make law for death sentence for just eve teasing, there is no guarantee that such crimes will stop. As a matter of fact stricter the law, there will be exaggerated stress on virginity and women will suffer by being confined to homes. They may not get even employment as the employers will be scary of women. Colleges and schools may avoid girls.

What really happens. There are various ways to look at an issue. The NGO pertaining to women want protection of women even against fifteen years old boy. The child right groups want protection of juveniles. Thus there comes conflict between women rights and child rights groups. If you make law lenient, there is demand for strict law. If the law is harsh, human rights groups jump in. It is necessary to take holistic view of issues and not jump to hasty decisions. This is like blow hot blow cold. Govt. and judiciary cannot work on sentiments only- which are often bizarre and impracticable.

So , Sonia Gandhi has agreed that her government is inacapable of giving protection to her citizens, and how can they since more than half the police is guarding her own party and other politicians,probably 10% for her family use .... Have they even looked at the issue of providing more staff , cutting their own and also employing more if needed , probably cutting down on some of their foreign trips and other merry making ...it is very easy for Madame Sonia to sit where she is and sermonise knowing that her own kith and kin are well protected...

She has confirmed her non- belief on her own government once again by leaving for a foreign country for her medical check up. She knows very well that the medical facilities in her own government are useless and worthless.

Seriously, just 3 years, are you kidding me! Indian law system has to change. Whether minor or adult, the suffering was same, then why only 3 years punishment, why not hanged till death??? People please take action!

This punishment is ridiculous. As good as allowing the juvenile to roam scotfree after such a lengthy proceedings. No wonder the dissatisfied members of the family decided to challenge JJB's order.

Thr minors are treated differently. This is for sufficient well thought reasons. The 'Nirbhaya case' justifies stricter punishment even to the minor but law cannot be changed for a single case. Hence he gets benefit of the law. Nobody can help this.

True.A law or policy is not cast in the stone. In tune with the changing times and the ever changing modes of crime, I think constitutional experts can think of change in the juvenile law.

They are already reviewing the law. Supreme Court is also hearing the plea for changes in juvenile law. But the law will not be changed retrospectively and hence the minor accused in the gang rape case gets benefit of his age of minority.

The law if it's changed need not have retrospective effect . Contemplating to change the law itself is a great thing.

If they had any sense they should have thought of it soon after the gang rape case ,once they realised how a minor is taking advantage of the law and getting away with rape and murder ! As usual, everything about this country is slow paced and thats what encourages the criminals to go on commiting such heinous crimes..

Government have enough time to amend law. Now it is time to change juvenile law so no one in future can get benefit of this law.