The events surrounding Sidharth Sharma’s death follows a familiar pattern. An innocent person lost his life because of the acts/omissions of another person. The loved ones of the victim and the general public rightfully expect and demand that the wrongdoer be punished and justice be served.
It is then discovered that the alleged wrongdoer will get away with ‘minor’ consequences because he happens to be under a certain age- a juvenile. The victim’s family and the general public feel a sense of helplessness and betrayal. It is argued that the punishment provided in law is not proportionate to the act of the offender and that if he/she was old enough to commit the act in question, he/she is also old enough to bear the consequences and must not be let off ‘lightly’. In this case there is also a demand that if not the juvenile, then his parents must suffer harsh consequences- they were reckless in letting a juvenile drive.
The police authorities have responded by framing serious charges against the father- that of abetment and death due to negligent driving. Neither charge will survive scrutiny in a court and appears to be aimed at assuaging the anger of the family.