Rape convict freed after 5 years in jail as he was 16 during crime

MUMBAI: After spending five years in jail for his role in the gang rape of a mentally challenged minor, a 22-year-old has been ordered released by the Bombay high court on Friday after it was found that he was a juvenile aged 16 years and 10 months at the time of the offence in 2013. The maximum penalty under the juvenile law for any crime is three years.

In 2016, he was sentenced to 20 years’ imprisonment along with an adult accused. In a significant order, the court said the juvenility claim by a person accused in a crime can be made at any stage—in this case even after a conviction.

The high court referred to an apex court judgment cited by the appellant’s advocate Shantanu Phanse.

Pointing to that judgment, the high court observed that the Supreme Court, after examining the scope of Section 7(A) of the Juvenile Justice Act, has held that the claim of juvenility can be raised before any court at any stage. “If it is found that such an accused had not completed 18 years of age on the date of commission of the offence, he is entitled to benefits of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000,” Justice A M Badar said in the judgment.

The case of a third person, also a minor, named in the offence was separated early on and he was sent before the Juvenile Justice Board for the proceedings.

On August 9, 2016, the special Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Pocso) Act court had sentenced the appellant.

While undergoing the sentence in jail, he submitted an appeal before the high court.

Subsequently, the appellant sent another communication from the jail, in which he claimed that was not an adult on the date of the offence—March 25, 2013.

On March 7, the court directed the Pocso judge to conduct an inquiry under the Juvenile Justice Act and submit the report.

The lower court conducted an inquiry by calling in the necessary documents, following the procedure prescribed by the Act, and submitted its report.

It took into consideration the appellant’a birth certificate and concluded that he was a juvenile in 2013.

The court said, “Thus, as the appellant is found to be a juvenile in conflict with law on the date of commission of the offence, he needs to be forwarded to the Juvenile Justice Board for passing appropriate orders, and the sentence, if any, passed by the learned trial court in the matter, shall be deemed to have no effect.”

The court said the appellant should be released from prison if not required in any other case. Further, the record and proceedings are to be placed before the concerned Juvenile Justice Board for passing appropriate orders. It also directed him to appear before the Juvenile Justice Board on September 11.