@
hinduguy,
You had eggs on your face and you are having eggs on your face again. See the comments and see whether public are agreeing with you or are rejecting you.
I knew I would not have eggs on my face, otherwise, I would not have posted the news article rejecting the verdict in the first place.
@
Aeronaut,
Please take care of that @
Shinigami,
Perhaps a coconut oil eating tamil lungi from South.
I am posting a few more comments posted by readers in the ToI comments section:
1.
An individual , be it girl or boy under the age of 18 , cannot be considered mature enough to make decesions on sexual relations since they are vulnurable to abuse having little or no awareness of the consequences of intimate physical relationships. For a girl getting pregenant at a tender age would mean being depirved of every opportunity she is entitled including getting a higher education and losing personal freedom. For a boy it could mean a huge responsibility and commitment that would forice him to look for hard labour to support the new family finanacially. The law should enforce stringent measures even it means it amounts to owning individuals under 18 as the state property. No harm in that .
2.
This is utter nonsense. agreed that he is not to be punished for kidnapping. but allowing him to marry a girl he took away "with her permission" at an age of 15 is stupidity. then what is all this nonsense about limit in age of consensual sex and marriage that are fixed by the govt? even if he is not guilty of kidnapping, he is still guilty of other offenses as per Indian law.
3.
if the Consensual sex with minor not crime, then why is the law for marriage age is 18 & 21. if the the boy & girl understand themself they can marry below their age.
4. so whats the problem if they ask for driving license? why consider them as not adult enough to drive?
5. Did the judge understand that in this country, rapist can also pressurize minor girls or their families to agree that sex was consensual. Also, did he not encourage teens of this country to indulge in sex at an early age? The judgement sounds very unconventional and brave but then West is a different society. In this cut throat competitive society of ours, teens will only spoil their future by indulging in sex at an early age especially if there is no law forbidding them. Even in west, consensual sex with a girl less than 16 years of age is a crime. If not 18 years, what was the minimum age that the judge defined? Or did he define no minimum age?
The judge should himself be tried for passing such a worthless judgement.
6.
If it is so then, Why not Juvenile Board is To Reduce the limit of Juvenile from 18 to 16, to reduce 70 & of Rapes committed by Juveniles ?????
7.
The law is tying itself into knots.
8. While transparency is a virtue , in a country with undeserving freedom, discretion should be applied before spreading such observations......
Many a criminal will now be tempted to have forged minor age certificate and also force the victim to sign a consensual document before assaulting the victim.....
9.
Does this mean that Child marriage is now OK and that giving birth to babies at the tender ages at 13 and 14 and 15 is just now acceptable? When all the parents and older relatives are happy with such marriages and in fact arrange theses with the blessings of all concerned now its OK according to additional sessions judge Dharmesh Sharma
10. India every thing’re possible, administration failure Maine reason.....
11.
Indian law is dump and blind, dump and blind can hear but can not do without support. And our bloody political leaders are supporter of this sickness society .........
12. below 18 boys and girls cant make love or romance, are we living in Afghanistan ?????????????????
13. Can't believe.
If this is the case than if a boy below 18 yrs rapes a woman without her consent, than this boy should not be treated like a juvenile. He shud be punished as per the adult.
