murder committed by a minor under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 and heniuous crime committee by minor

important case laws related to minors committing murder in India, particularly relevant under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, and now also contextualized with the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS):

1. Salil Bali v. Union of India (2013) 7 SCC 705

Issue: Constitutionality of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 (as it existed then), especially the age limit of 18 years for juveniles.

Held:

• The Supreme Court upheld the age limit of 18 years.
• Rejected the idea that heinous crimes by minors automatically justify adult trials.

Relevance: Reinforces the idea that minors, even if they commit heinous offences, should primarily be treated as children in need of reform, not punishment.

2. Kulai Ibrahim v. State of Coimbatore (2014 SCC OnLine Mad 2092)

Issue: Whether a minor charged with murder could be tried as an adult.

Held:

• Emphasized that the Juvenile Justice Board must first conduct a preliminary assessment of the minor’s mental and physical capacity.

Relevance: Aligns with Section 15 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 (applicable under BNS too). No automatic trial as an adult.

3. Jitendra Singh alias Babboo Singh v. State of U.P. (2013) 11 SCC 193

Issue: Minor accused of murder sought leniency under the JJ Act.

Held:

• Conviction upheld, but the sentence was modified considering the accused was a juvenile at the time of the offence.

Relevance: Even if found guilty, sentencing considers age and reformative needs.

4. Shilpa Mittal v. State of NCT of Delhi (2020) 2 SCC 787

Issue: Clarified the interpretation of “heinous offences” under the JJ Act.

Held:

• Only those offences where the minimum punishment is 7 years or more are considered “heinous.”

Relevance: Murder qualifies as heinous, but assessment for adult trial must still be individualized.

5. Ram Singh & Others v. State of Delhi (2012 Delhi Gang Rape Case)

Fact: One of the accused was a minor.

Held:

• The juvenile was tried under the JJ Act and given 3 years in a reform home despite public outrage.

Relevance: Reinforced the distinction in treatment for juveniles, regardless of the crime's gravity.

 Summary

These cases show that while murder by a minor is treated as a heinous offence, the law mandates:

• A preliminary assessment by the Juvenile Justice Board.
• An approach focused on reformation, not retribution.
• Courts have consistently balanced public safety with the minor's right to rehabilitation.