Important points from the judgement:

The JJ Act, 2000 had been enforced to give effect to India’s international obligations arising
from the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice,
1985, the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989 and the United Nations
Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty, 1990.
“If the Legislature has adopted the age of 18 as the dividing line between juveniles and adults
and such a decision is Constitutionally permissible, the enquiry by the courts must come to an
end.”
“The avowed object of juvenile justice is to ensure their rehabilitation in society and to
enable the young offenders to become useful members of the society in later years. India has
accepted the above position and legislative wisdom has led to the enactment of the JJ Act in
its present form. If the Act has treated all persons under 18 as a separate category for the
purposes of differential treatment so far as the commission of offences are concerned, we do
not see how the contentions advanced by the Petitioners to the contrary on the strength of the
thinking and practices in other jurisdictions can have any relevance.”