Though the court upheld his conviction in the heinous crime, it ordered his immediate release from prison finding that at the time of commission of the crime, the accused was a juvenile, who could be given a maximum remand of three years in a reform home.
The court had constituted a medical board last year, 16 years after the crime, to determine the convict's age as there was no documentary evidence to establish his correct age. The board found him to be about 17 years and 2 months old on the date of the incident after determining his approximate present age.
After considering the report, a bench headed by Justice T S Thakur said, "We have persuaded ourselves to go by the age estimate given by the medical board and to declare the appellant to be a juvenile as on the date of the occurrence. No matter the offence committed by him is heinous and but for the protection available to him under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act, the appellant may have deserved the severest punishment permissible under law."
Stay updated on the go with The Times of India’s mobile apps. Click here to download it for your device.
0 comments:
Post a Comment