Murder?

l have read a few posts and views that categorically state that murder is murder and the fact that it is committed by a juvenile is irrelevant. I have to respectfully disagree, murder is the wilful and premeditated act of taking someone's life. Causing someone's death by accident is manslaughter, Shaurya never set out with the intent to harm anyone. I can't call Shaurya a murderer or say that Mehak's parents were murdered , they were the tragic victims of an accident. Intent is so very very important. If we don't make a distinction between being a juvenile or adult in this instance then we have to accept that this distinction does not have validity in any sphere because we cannot pick and choose when we consider a child to be child. To those of us who have children this would be untenable as far as l am concerned.

I agree...The intent and the fact that he was a juvenile does not make this a murder. Legally and morally, this is an accident and doesn't make it a murder and him a murderer.

true but if we want to speak about and to the eyes of the law, it is the grandmother who should be held responsible and chared.

fizzyfairy,

May be the fact that we are Indians and our first language is Hindi ... which is not so evolved ... to differentiate between Man slaughter and murder (if I were to really nitpick ... slaughter bole to killing ..
When you put an axe to the neck of an animal and kill it .. you call it slaughter ) so what exactly is Man slaughter ???

Historically When an invader comes marauding down and mass kills .. the term slaughter is used

Anyways in my language and value system I cannot really differentiate between the two ..
I do not know if there is any other Indian language that differentiate between them
Value wise if you are speeding in a car .. that is known to humans ... has an ability to kill people ... in my value system is a murder
legal speak ... could not care any less
Again I think we all are free to have our opinions, but mine is very strong on this

Originally posted by: latanzia

true but if we want to speak about and to the eyes of the law, it is the grandmother who should be held responsible and chared.

Shaurya being a minor should have never been allowed to drive, that being said, an adult was present in the vehicle. i do not know about India but i know in the US that old hag (grandmother) would have been charge with negligent homicide, reckless endangerment and endangering the well fare of a child.

Yes she is one who responsible for the accident who encourage a teenage boy to drive the vehicle

only half of the part we know, maybe mehak parents careless try to cross the road, some one cut the break wire know that Shaurya is with her mother family want to get rid of him hope something like that will come in future

@Fizzy- Agree with you. Shauire's only intention was to please his gran and am with Karuna, when she held her responsible for the accident.

I think we'll have to wait for them to elaborate what happened after the accident.

My guess is Karuna told SK his Nani died in the accident and he himself might have been injured and spent time in hospital while the Khannas covered up.

IMO, The choice of owning up his act was taken away from him by the cover up and am sure he'll own up once he comes to know.

An accident is called an accident because it wasn't intentional. A murder has to have a motive.

I want to share a real life accident case, a promising engineering student lost control of his bike and ran over an old lady and was jailed. His Mom was a cancer patient and the victim's family helped them with the bail, so that he could be with her during her last days. I hope the Sharmas has it in them to go beyond their grief and loss and forgive Shauirya for his past and accept him.

Murder or Man slaughter. What ever u call someone is died that can't be denied. If it is done by intently or accident, u r guilty. Law doesn't see he has done it by purpose or not. He was driving recklessly, he was playing with car not driving. Nani provoking to drive fast & he was driving fast. How he was allowed to drive when adults were present in the car. Nani is also responsible for their death she was provoking him drive fast.

To add, no i don't see him as a murderer, whether he was underage or not doesn't matter. It was an accident and he was protected from the law.Let him make his choice to own up his childish zeal that resulted in the death of two people and damaged many lives, including his.

anyone who drives is a potential murder of pedestrians and other drivers on the road.

Death is permanent loss of the loved one from the life,even intend was not there but still the person who did the accident can't bring the person back to the family...that loss is irreparable and for the family who has lost the loved one intend don't matter and that person will always remain a criminal their eyes whether done intentionally or not such things cannot be easily forgiven.