Supreme Court of India

Shilpa Mittal v State of NCT of Delhi

(2020) 2 SCC 78720201 min read
The case in brief30-second read
Facts
A juvenile aged above 16 was accused of an offence punishable with a maximum of ten years and no minimum sentence. The question was whether he could be treated as having committed a heinous offence.
Issue
Whether an offence with a maximum above seven years but no minimum, or a minimum below seven years, is a heinous offence under S.2(33) of the JJ Act, 2015.
Held
A heinous offence is one with a minimum sentence of seven years or more. Offences with a maximum above seven years but no minimum, or a minimum below seven years, are not heinous; until Parliament addressed the gap, they were to be treated as serious offences.
Principle
Only offences carrying a minimum of seven years are heinous under the JJ Act.
Cite this

Facts

  • A juvenile aged above 16 was accused of an offence punishable with a maximum of ten years and no minimum sentence. The question was whether he could be treated as having committed a heinous offence.

Issue

  1. Whether an offence with a maximum above seven years but no minimum, or a minimum below seven years, is a heinous offence under S.2(33) of the JJ Act, 2015.

Held

  • A heinous offence is one with a minimum sentence of seven years or more. Offences with a maximum above seven years but no minimum, or a minimum below seven years, are not heinous; until Parliament addressed the gap, they were to be treated as serious offences.

Cite this

Citation

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

Reported: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/187771162/. This is an educational summary, not the judgment itself. Cite the reported version in professional or academic work.