top of page
Question Bank
Question
In the context of Indian criminal law, what is the legal significance of establishing that an accused was a "juvenile" at the time of committing an offence?
Solution
Establishing that an accused was a juvenile at the time of the offence is of profound legal significance as it triggers the application of a separate justice system designed for children. The primary objective shifts from punitive measures to reformation and rehabilitation. A juvenile cannot be tried or punished in the same manner as an adult; they are dealt with by the Juvenile Justice Board under the special provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. If found guilty, they are sent to a special home, not a regular prison, and any sentence must be conducive to their rehabilitation. Crucially, a person who was a juvenile at the time of the offence cannot be sentenced to death or life imprisonment without the possibility of release.
Question
Explain the statutory hierarchy for determining the age of a person claiming to be a juvenile in conflict with the law, as prescribed under Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015.
Solution
Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 establishes a clear order of priority for evidence when determining age. The most preferred and highest form of evidence is the date of birth certificate from the school or another educational board. If this is unavailable, the next priority is the birth certificate issued by a municipal authority or panchayat. Only in the absence of both these primary documentary evidence sources can the court or Board resort to a medical opinion, such as an ossification test. The law places the ossification test at the lowest rung of this hierarchy because it provides an estimated age range and becomes highly uncertain for individuals over 25 years old.
Question
What does the phrase "Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code" mean, and how does it establish criminal liability?
Solution
The phrase "Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code" refers to the concept of constructive liability or common intention. Section 302 IPC itself defines the offence of murder and prescribes its punishment. When it is "read with" Section 34, it implies that the act was committed by multiple persons in furtherance of a common intention. This legal doctrine holds each person involved in the criminal act liable for the ultimate outcome, even if the actual act was performed by only one of them. For Section 34 to apply, it must be proven that there was a prior meeting of minds and a shared intention to commit a criminal act, and the offence was committed in furtherance of that common intention.
Question
What is an "ossification test," and what are its limitations as evidence in judicial proceedings for age determination?
Solution
An ossification test (or bone age test) is a medical procedure where X-rays are taken of certain bones and joints to assess the degree of fusion of growth plates. This fusion follows a general timeline, allowing doctors to estimate a person's age range. However, its evidentiary value in court is limited and considered subordinate to documentary evidence. The key limitations are that it cannot determine an exact age but only a probable range, and more importantly, the test becomes highly uncertain and unreliable for individuals above the age of 25, as most growth plates fuse by that age, making any estimation speculative.
Question
In the Indian criminal justice system, what are the sequential judicial avenues available to a person convicted by a trial court to challenge their conviction?
Solution
A person convicted by a trial court has a structured, hierarchical path to challenge the verdict. The first and primary remedy is to file a Criminal Appeal before the respective High Court. The appellant can often seek suspension of sentence and be released on bail during the appeal's pendency. If the High Court upholds the conviction, the next recourse is to file a Special Leave Petition (SLP) before the Supreme Court of India, seeking permission to appeal. The Supreme Court's decision to dismiss the SLP typically signifies the exhaustion of the main judicial appellate process, after which the conviction becomes final. Subsequently, a writ petition can be filed under the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction to challenge the conviction on specific, limited grounds, such as a violation of fundamental rights or the emergence of new, crucial facts like a claim of juvenility.
bottom of page