The law in its majesty does not seek vengeance. So is the case with them.
Had there been a man like the Godfather, the weeping parents of the media christened 'Nirbhaya' wouldn't have to weep.
It is said that he was the most ruthless. But the courts called him a minor.
It is said that he did the maximum harm. But the courts only gave him a measly 3 year sentence.
The answer is that he was a minor. Just because he has a year (6 months precisely) to attain the celebrated status of being an adult does not mean that he is not capable of doing a crime. A crime as heinous as shredding life out of a lady in a moving bus accompanied by heartless 2-legged beasts.
Ripped the poor soul apart.
Shattered the family's dream.
A question that erupts from many minds would be: Is a 17 year old a child or a man?
He was a man, a rogue imbecile anarchic example of how a man should not be. Yet, for a crime that ought to get his instrument chopped off, he just got 3 years in a juvenile home. The 8 month period before trials was cut off from the period and in effect he would be serving just 28 months.
How nice of them to cut off atleast something?
Time would churn him out to be a hardened criminal and man of low personal demeanor. But do they allow 18+ year old in juvenile? The mystery of the verdict still remains.
We really need Corleones to get things sorted. Revenge tastes good only when it is served cold. But really does not happen in this era of erring humanity and unstructured way of life.
While we protest and hold rallies against this maddening disease, danger still lurks behind the ladies and rapists would remain at large!