Q19·CSAT · Prelims 2026

RC — Juvenile Justice Statutory Inferences

Reading Comp.RC — InferenceReading Comprehension● Medium

Question

[PASSAGE] The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, or the JJ Act, 2015 allows for the possibility for trying adolescents above 16 as adults if they are accused of committing a heinous offence. A heinous offence is one with a minimum punishment of seven years. Offences such as culpable homicide and causing death by negligence, which are common in drunken driving cases, are not heinous offences because they do not have a prescribed minimum punishment. The JJ Act, amended in 2021, now categorises an offence that has no minimum sentence, but has a maximum sentence of seven years or more as a serious offence which nonetheless, in the opinion of activists, does not merit the transfer of a case to the adult criminal justice system.

[QUESTION] Which of the following conclusions is/are valid?

1Only a serious offence as categorised by the revised JJ Act, justifies the transfer of a case to the adult judicial system.

2The JJ Act, 2021, categorises an offence as a serious offence based on the maximum sentence it carries, rather than on the minimum sentence.

Options

1 only

2 only

Answer

Both 1 and 2

Neither 1 nor 2

Explanation

Let us analyze both conclusions using the provided text guidelines [cite: 3820, 3821, 3822, 3823]:

Conclusion 1 is invalid: The text notes that under the 2015 Act, it is a heinous offense (defined by a minimum sentence of 7 years) that permits trying adolescents as adults[cite: 3820, 3821]. The 2021 revision introduces a separate category for serious offenses, which activists argue should not lead to an adult court transfer. Therefore, the word 'Only' makes Statement 1 a clear inversion of the text.

Conclusion 2 is valid: The text explicitly states that the amended Act defines a serious offense as one that 'has no minimum sentence, but has a maximum sentence of seven years or more', confirming that this classification relies on the maximum sentence parameter.

Legal text tracking requires mapping specific category boundaries exactly as stated, without confusing separate classes like heinous and serious offenses.

Answer: (b).

Question details

Year

2026

Paper

CSAT

Question

Q19

Section

Comprehension

Sub-topic

RC — Inference

Type

Reading Comprehension

Difficulty

Medium

Source hint

RC passage — legal statutory analysis

See all questions on RC — Inference

Browse every tagged question across all years

Explore →

Back to CSAT 2026