In Brief
Becharam Acharya and Chinta Acharya challenged their criminal convictions, asserting they were juveniles at the time of the alleged offence (27 March 1998). Becharam was 17 years, 2 months and 14 days old on that date but had been denied juvenile benefits because he was over 16. The Supreme Court held that the amended Juvenile Justice Act, 2000—which defines juvenility as being under 18 years—applies retrospectively. Since Becharam was less than 18 at the time of occurrence, he is entitled to juvenile status and its protective provisions. The Court directed the trial court to review whether the appellants had served sentences exceeding the juvenile maximum. Appeal allowed.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.