One of the offenders is a juvenile who will get off with a lighter sentence of 3 years. Should an exception be made given the heinous nature of the Delhi gangrape case?

The chargesheet filed by the Delhi Police on the gangrape incident has brought attention to the Juvenile Justice Act. The juvenile among the six accused could get away with a much lighter sentence. But given that he was allegedly the most brutal assaulter in this case, is it time to make an exception?

Nina Nayak of the National Commission for the Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) does not feel that the juvenile should get the same punishment as the other offenders. Speaking to Rajdeep Sardesai on CNN-IBN, she said, "We as a larger society have completely failed the child. He has really been on the streets. This child comes from a very very difficult background."

She argued that because the offender is a juvenile - below 18 years of age - he should be sent to a correctional home with a much lighter sentence of 3 years and given a chance to reform.

Senior Supreme Court lawyer C A Sundaram did not agree. He said, "Given the nature of the crime he should be tried in the same way as the rest of the offenders."

While child rights activits like Nina Nayak are focussing on the reformative aspect of jurispridence, Sundaram reminded that there were two more aspects to it - deterrence and retribution. He said, "Reformation is also important. But that can be decided at the stage of punishment by the judge. Why should a person who is 18 years and 2 months get lesser chance of reform?"

According to him, it was highly paradoxical that one is confusing age with his backgrouund - given that the juvenile offender did have a very exploitative childhood, as has also been confirmed in the police testimony. He said, "How can it be that if he is 17 and a half his background will exonerate him and if he is a day older than 18, it will get him punished?"

This has also shed light on the reform of the Juvenile Justice Act which has been on the anvil for quite some time where the issue of the age limit of 18 has also come under scrutiny.

Sundaram said, "The real test should not depend on some arbitrary age limit. The test that is prevalent in most countries rests on whether the offender is aware of the heinousness of the crime (at any age) and is repentant of his actions later."