Supreme Court · 2017 INSC 658 · Decided 21 July 2017
MS. Eera Through DR. Manjula Krippendorf v. State (GOVT. of NCT of Delhi) & ANR.
- Court
- Supreme Court of India
- Citation
- 2017 INSC 658 · [2017] 7 S.C.R. 924
- Case number
- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1217/2017
- Decided
- 21 July 2017
- Bench
- DIPAK MISRA, R.F. NARIMAN (2-judge bench)
- Outcome
- Disposed off
- Case type
- Criminal
- Acts & sections cited
- POCSO Act Section 2(d); Juvenile Justice Act
Headnote
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012: Object of its legislation - Discussed. (Per Dipak Misra, J.) s.2(d) - Age - Term 'age' does not include mental age - The Parliament felt it appropriate that the definition of the term "age" by chronological age be the safest yardstick than referring to a person having mental retardation - It may be due to the fact that the standards of menta1 retardation are different D and they require to be determined by an expert body - The degree is also different - By saying that "age" covers "mental
Judgments are the courts' own published copies, provided for study; they are not certified copies. Source: Indian Supreme Court & High Court Judgments, Dattam Labs (CC-BY-4.0)