Determination of Juvenility in the Kathua Rape Case: Legal Insights

The case in question involves the determination of the juvenility of Shubam Sangra, one of the accused in the heinous Kathua rape and murder case. The incident shocked the nation as it involved the brutal gang rape and murder of an 8-year-old girl by a group of six men. The question at hand is whether Shubam Sangra was a juvenile at the time of the commission of the crime.

This appeal originates from the State of Jammu & Kashmir (now a Union Territory) challenging the order of the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir, which affirmed the decision of the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) Kathua, who had declared Sangra a juvenile based on his date of birth. The State argues that the lower courts did not correctly consider the available evidence and that the juvenile claim should be rejected.

Factual Background

The victim, an 8-year-old girl from the Bakarwal community, was abducted, gang-raped, and murdered in January 2018 in Rasana village, Jammu & Kashmir. After a week, her body was discovered, and eight individuals were arrested in connection with the crime. Shubam Sangra, one of the accused, claimed to be a juvenile, which led to a separate trial. Six co-accused were convicted, but Sangra’s trial was postponed due to his age claim. This case concerns whether his juvenility claim was valid.

Read also: https://judgmentlibrary.com/clarification-in-contempt-petition-custody-and-imprisonment-period-dispute/

Petitioner and Respondent Arguments

Petitioner’s Argument

The State, represented by senior counsel Mr. P.S. Patwalia, argued that both the CJM and the High Court erred in declaring Sangra a juvenile. He highlighted discrepancies in the birth certificates submitted, specifically a contradiction between the birth certificate from the Municipal Committee and the one from the school. The State also pointed to medical reports estimating Sangra’s age to be between 19 and 23 years, suggesting that he was an adult at the time of the crime.

Respondent’s Argument

The respondent’s counsel, however, emphasized the legitimacy of the birth certificate issued by the Municipal Committee, which clearly recorded Sangra’s birth date as 23 October 2002, making him a juvenile at the time of the offense. They argued that the Juvenile Justice Act mandates that juveniles be treated differently from adults, regardless of the severity of the crime. The medical opinion estimating Sangra’s age was deemed to be an expert opinion and not conclusive, thus not overriding the birth certificate.

Judge’s Arguments

The Supreme Court, after reviewing both the arguments and the available documents, noted the importance of ensuring the credibility of the evidence regarding the date of birth. While birth certificates issued by the Municipal Committee and school records are typically relied upon for determining juvenility, the Court acknowledged the discrepancies in the evidence presented. Given the contradictions, the Court emphasized that a more thorough investigation was required to verify Sangra’s age accurately.

The Court also pointed out that the Juvenile Justice Act, while being a benevolent legislation aimed at reforming young offenders, should not be misused to shield those committing heinous crimes under the guise of juvenility. In cases where there is doubt regarding the age of the accused, the Court held that a medical board’s opinion, based on physical, dental, and radiological tests, should be considered.

Read also: https://judgmentlibrary.com/supreme-court-restores-bail-for-accused-in-dowry-death-case/

Conclusion

The Supreme Court ultimately concluded that Shubam Sangra was not a juvenile at the time of the offense, setting aside the orders of the CJM and the High Court. The Court noted that the discrepancies in the birth certificates, combined with the medical report estimating his age as between 19 and 23 years, provided sufficient grounds to treat him as an adult. The decision highlighted the importance of thorough scrutiny of age determination documents in cases involving serious crimes.

Petitioner Name: State of Jammu & Kashmir.
Respondent Name: Shubam Sangra.
Judgment By: Justice Ajay Rastogi, Justice J.B. Pardiwala.
Place Of Incident: Rasana, Jammu & Kashmir.
Judgment Date: 16-11-2022.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: state-of-jammu-&-kas-vs-shubam-sangra-supreme-court-of-india-judgment-dated-16-11-2022.pdf