Which of the following conclusions is/are valid? 1. Only a serious offence as categorised by the revised JJ Act, justifies the transfer of a case to the adult judicial system. 2. The JJ Act, 2021, categorises an offence as a serious offence based on the maximum sentence it carries, rather than on the minimum sentence. Select the answer using the code given below.
- (a) 1 only
- (b) 2 only ✓ UPSC's answer
- (c) Both 1 and 2
- (d) Neither 1 nor 2
Why the answer is (b)
• The passage states that the JJ Act, 2015 allows for trying adolescents above 16 as adults if accused of a 'heinous offence', which is defined as having a minimum punishment of seven years.
• The passage further states that the JJ Act, amended in 2021, categorises an offence with no minimum sentence but a maximum sentence of seven years or more as a 'serious offence'.
• Statement 1 is invalid because the passage explicitly mentions that 'heinous offences' (minimum punishment of 7 years) also justify transfer to the adult system, not 'only' serious offences.
• Statement 2 is valid because the passage explicitly defines a 'serious offence' under the 2021 amendment based on the 'maximum sentence' of seven years or more, rather than a minimum sentence.
• Therefore, only Statement 2 is a valid conclusion based on the text.
Why the other options are wrong
- (a) 1 only
- Statement 1 is invalid because heinous offences also justify transfer to the adult system, not just serious offences.
- (c) Both 1 and 2
- Statement 1 is invalid because heinous offences also justify transfer to the adult system, not just serious offences.
- (d) Neither 1 nor 2
- Statement 2 is valid because the passage explicitly defines serious offences based on the maximum sentence.
Asked in the CSAT Paper II of the UPSC Civil Services Preliminary Examination 2026, held on 24 May 2026. Question and answer key: Union Public Service Commission. Explanation: UPSC Answer Check.