If a tougher law had existed on the statue books in 2012, the ‘child’ who played a brutal role in the rape and murder of a para-medical student in New Delhi in 2015 would have been judged differently. He missed a harsher sentence by a few months. It certainly is disturbing that the convict walked free after three years in a remand home for a heinous crime that revolted the collective conscience of the nation and forced the then government to amend rape laws. The upper house made amends and on Tuesday passed the bill after a prolonged debate on the pros and cons. The new law now allows juveniles in the age group of 16-18 years of age to be tried as adults in a certain category of crimes.
The distraught parents of the girl were at the centre of a movement to ensure the bill was passed by the Rajya Sabha. The trauma suffered by the parents of the girl is unimaginable. TMC member of Parliament Derek O’Brien, who urged members to pass the bill said he has a 20-year-old daughter and he would have shot the person who raped her instead of waiting for the police to investigate and the courts to pass an order. The anguish of every parent is understandable, but will a harsher punishment make girls safer?
Stricter rape laws passed following the gang rape of the student have done little to reduce incidences of rape. Perhaps, the new law will take time to sink in, but many in the legal fraternity are not convinced that harsher laws act as a deterrent. The 2012 gang rape was brutal, but statistics show that only 3.4 per cent of the rapes were registered against juveniles in the age group of 16-18 years. Cases of statutory rape are also included in this figure and MPs pointed out that a lot of boys who merely eloped with minor girls might face harsher punishments unless other laws are changed to differentiate rape from statutory rape. There was pressure on MPs in the upper house to pass the bill, even though a section had preferred to send it to a select committee where the merits and demerits can be debated more coolly and away from the crucible of public opinion.
The bill was also opposed because some MPs perceived it as revenge-seeking. However, the thought of the minor convict escaping justice only because of his age and not the nature of the crime committed by him, and the spirited campaign by Union Minister Maneka Gandhi inside the House saw it through. Gandhi listed the heinous crimes committed by juveniles and asked the House a simple question: How should we deal with crimes of this nature? The added urgency to amend the law was also consequent on the observation of the Supreme Court that it could not prevent the release of the boy convict as the law had tied its hands. In the end, members of the Rajya Sabha had a hard choice to make: side with the rapists or the victim and they rightly opted to stand by the victim. Nirbhaya’s death has not gone in vain.
