JUVENILE JUSTICE ACT: AN OVERVIEW

A juvenile or a child refers to a person who is yet to complete eighteen years of age. As
per the definition given by Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 under section 2(k), a boy or a girl under
18 years of age is a juvenile. The first contact that an immature juvenile delinquent has with
the juvenile justice system is with a police official. The nature and state of affairs of this
police contact are likely to be noteworthy and have a long lasting inkling on a young person.
The problematic nature of dealings between police and young people has time and again been
highlighted in the research works. Interactions between police and young people are often
characterized by disagreement and stress, with high levels of annoyance, fear and mistrust on
both sides.
While girls have historically made up a small percentage of the juvenile justice population,
offending by girls is on the rise. Not only is the overall number of juvenile delinquency cases
for non-violent crimes on the rise, girls are accounting for a larger proportion of the
delinquency pie than they did during the 1980. The ratio if girls to boys committing IPC
Crimes in 2012 was reported 1:19, the same was 1:20 in 2011. Most assessment tools and
treatment models used with youth in the justice system were designed for use with male
offenders and have not been adequately tested with females. Until we have more research, we
cannot know if these assessments and interventions are effective with offending girls. The age
of juvenility of a boy child under JJA 1986 was below 16 years and that of a girl child was
below 18 years of age. Those working in the field of children had campaigned to increase the
age of boy juveniles to bring it on power with girl juveniles. The age of a boy juvenile has
been increased to 18 years by JJA 2000 mainly to bring juvenile legislation into conformity
with the Convention on Rights of Children which the Government of India had ratified on
11th December 1992. Section 83 of IPC states that Nothing is an offence which is done by a
child above seven years of age and under twelve, who has not attained sufficient maturity of
understanding to judge of the nature and consequences of his conduct on that occasion.

The Concept of Juvenile Justice System

The concept of juvenile justice was derived from a belief that the problems of juvenile
delinquency and youth in abnormal situations are not amenable to resolution within the
framework of the traditional processes of criminal law. The Juvenile Justice System therefore
is not designed to respond to the needs of young offenders only. One principle role of the
Juvenile Justice System has been to provide specialized and preventive treatment services for
children and young
Juvenile justice is the area of criminal law applicable to persons not old enough to be held
responsible for criminal acts. In most states, the age for criminal culpability is set at 18 years.
Juvenile law is mainly governed by state law and most states have enacted a juvenile code.
The main goal of the juvenile justice system is rehabilitation rather than punishment.
Juveniles can be transferred into adult court if the juvenile court waives or relinquishes
its jurisdiction.
State statutes creating juvenile courts and providing methods for dealing with juvenile
delinquencey have generally been upheld by courts as an acceptable extension of state police
power to ensure the safety and welfare of children. The doctrine of parens patriae authorizes
the state to legislate for the protection, care, custody, and maintenance of children within its
jurisdiction.
The federal role in the field has largely been that of funder and standard setter. Congress
passed the Juvenile Delinquency Prevention and Control Act in 1968. This was later revised
in 1972, and renamed the Juvenile Delinquency Prevention Act. The stated purpose of the act
is to assist states and local communities in providing community based preventative services
to youths in danger of becoming delinquent, to help train individuals in occupations
providing such services, and to provide technical assistance in the field.
The Federal Juvenile Delinquency Act defines juvenile delinquency (any act that is otherwise
a crime, but is committed by someone under 18 years of age) and sets forth rules by which
state laws must comply with regard to juvenile court procedures and punishments.
Crime and the Treatment of Offenders identified three models of juvenile justice system
on the basis of contemporary approaches to dealing with juvenile offenders;
(a) The due procedural model;
2

(b) The social welfare model; and

(c) The participatory process model.
The first model is based upon the concept of legality, the role of law and due process, the
professional lawyers making the main decisions. The second model is based upon notions of
economic and social justice through State planning and Welfare, with administrators and
professionals from the "helping services" making the main decision. The resolution of the
issue with respect to the first two competing models is essential for the proper development
of a mechanism to control and protect the juveniles. The third model resolves the issue
because juvenile justice can more meaningfully take place at the macro level, with greater
participation of citizens in the resolving or containing of conflict at the local level with a
minimum intervention of the centralized power structure of the modern State.
The third model exists still in the pre-industrialized countries and is also applied to juvenile
and youthful offenders in the developing countries. At present there is hardly any country in
which juvenile justice system subscribes entirely to one of these three models. Most juvenile
justice systems have elements of each model to a varying degree. The balance between the
three models has been achieved according to the culture and the stage of development of a
country. The juvenile justice system in each country is related to the history and culture of the
country, to the criminal justice system for adults and to other social institution.

Who is Juvenile
A juvenile is a person who is under the age of 18. The age limit below which it should not be
permitted to deprive a child of his or her liberty should be determined by law. Juvenile can be
defined as a child who has not attained a certain age at which he, like an adult person under
the law of the land, can be held liable for his criminal acts. The juvenile is a child who is
alleged to have committed /violated some law which declares the act or omission on the part
of the child as an offence. Juvenile and minor in legal terms are used in different context.
Juvenile is used when reference is made to a young criminal offenders and minor relates to
legal capacity or majority.10 To make the meaning more clear resort can profitably be made
to some other source. The concept of the juvenile varies from State of State for convenience.

History Of Juvenile Justice Legislation In India

The first legislation on juvenile justice in India came in 1850 with the Apprentice Act which
required that children between the ages of 10-18 convicted in courts to be provided
vocational training as part of their rehabilitation process. This act was transplanted by
theReformatory Schools Act, 1897, the Indian Jail Committee and later the Children Act of
1960. The Juvenile Justice Bill was first introduced in the Lok Sabha on 22 August 1986.
This Act was further amended in 2006 and 2011 and is now known as the Juvenile Justice
(Care and Protection) Act, 2000. The State of Jammu and Kashmir has repealed its existing
juvenile law of 1997 and has enacted the Jammu & Kashmir (Care and Protection of
Children) Act 2013. This legislation is very similar to India's national juvenile law except that
it does not contain any provision on adoption.
Section 21 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (56 of 2000) as
amended by the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Amendment Act, 2006 (33
of 2006)., states that: Prohibition of publication of name, etc., of juvenile or child in need of
care and protection involved in any proceeding under the Act-(1) No report in any newspaper,
magazine, news-sheet or visual media of any inquiry regarding a juvenile in conflict with law
or a child in need of care and protection under this Act shall disclose the name, address or
school or any other particulars calculated to lead to the identification of the juvenile or child
shall nor shall any picture of any such juvenile or child shall be published: Provided that for
any reason to be recorded in writing, the authority holding the inquiry may permit such
disclosure, if in its opinion such disclosure is in the interest of the juvenile or the child. (2)
Any person who contravenes the provisions of sub-section (1), shall be liable to a penalty
which may extend to twenty-five thousand rupees.
While provisions relating to the Juveniles in conflict with law are very important from
jurisprudence point of view, this Act becomes very crucial for Children in Need of Care and
Protection, as they are very large in number. Section 29 of the Act provides constituting five
members District (Administrative unit in India) level quasi-judicial body "Child Welfare
Committee". One of the members is designated as Chairperson. At least one of the members
shall be woman. The Committee shall have the final authority to dispose of cases for the care,
protection, treatment, development and rehabilitation of the 'Children in Need of Care and
Protection' as well as to provide for their basic needs and protection of human rights.

The

Supreme

Court

of

India

vide

Judgement

in Hari

Ram

Versus

State

of

Rajasthan confirmed the retrospective effect of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 in 2009, which
was earlier confirmed by some of the High Courts in India, particularly by Bombay High
Court.
Pursuant to an order of Delhi High Court, the Act was further amended in 2011 whereby
certain provisions which were discriminatory to the persons affected by leprosy have been
deleted.
A revamped Juvenile Justice Bill was passed in the Lok Sabha on May 7, 2015 in the
aftermath of the Delhi Rape Case of December, 2012 in which a minor was found guilty. The
new bill will allow minors in the age group of 16-18 to be tried as adults if they commit
heinous crimes. The crime will be examined by the Juvenile Justice Board to ascertain if the
crime was committed as a 'child' or an 'adult'.

What is Juvenile Delinquency

Delinquency is a kind of abnormality. When an individual deviates from the course of normal
social life his behaviour is called 'Delinquenct'. When a juvenile, below an age specified
under a statute exhibits behaviour which may prove to be dangerous to society and / or for
him, he may be called a Juvenile delinquent. Juvenile delinquents are those offenders
including boys and girls who are under 18 years of age. A Juvenile delinquent is a young
person incorrigible or habitually disobedient.
Act of delinquency may include:
1. Running away from home without the permission of parents.
2. Habitual behavior beyond the control of parents.
3. Spending time idly beyond limits
4. Use of vulgar languages
5. Wandering about rail roads, streets market places
6. Visiting gambling centre
7. Committing sexual offences
8. Shop-lifting
9. Stealing etc.
Juveniles may do such activities singly or through a gang.
There are other social or environmental factors which lead them to be a delinquent. Some of
them are mentioned below:
(a) School dissatisfaction is a major cause of child delinquency. Some students get
dissatisfied with school life. Parental irresponsibility, unmanageable student teacher ratio,
lack of entertainment and sports facilities in school, indifference of the teachers may
contribute to this. Such dissatisfied students become regular absentees in schools and start

wandering their own and become gamblers, eve-teachers, pick pockets, drunkards, smokers
and drug addicts.
(b) Films and pornographic literature have also added to the magnitude of delinquency.
Cinema, television and obscene literature may often provoke sexual and other impulses in
adolescents. Hence they may start their adventure in satisfying them in the process of which
they commit crimes.
(C) Deep slated inner desired couples with outside pressures; compulsion and temptation also
contribute to juvenile delinquency. For example, on hearing the interesting narration of the
illicit sex experiences or such other criminal experiences from one other may be tempted to
follow the same.
According to psycho-analytical view, the delinquent is an individual who is governed by the
pleasure principle. He wants to get immediate pleasure and immediate satisfaction for his
needs. So he becomes victim to his own impulses.
Thus it may be said that juvenile delinquency is also the result of environmental factors. A
grave problem such as juvenile delinquency can't he solved by means of legislation and
government efforts alone. As far as India is concerned in many of the states Children Acts
have not been effectively enforced. Some of these Acts themselves have defects. Official
machinery is not effectively used for controlling this problem. Government as well as private
agencies must work hand in hand with all sincerity and seriousness to find on effective
remedy for the problem of juvenile delinquency. The public attitude towards Juvenile
delinquents must also change. A juvenile delinquent is a product of unwholesome
environment congenial for the development of his faculties in conformity with social
expectations.

WOMEN AND CRIME

Girls having historically made up a very low percentage of the juvenile justice population,
offending by the girls is on the rise today. It is not that only the overall number of juvenile
delinquency cases for non-violent crimes is on the rise, but also the girls are accounting for a
larger proportion of the delinquency pie than they did during the 1980s. While the crime
which are violent in nature and are done by the juveniles has decreased overall since 1985,
girls are prone to commit more of those offenses than they did in 1985. Knowing that there
has been an increase in the involvement of the girls in the justice system, but understanding
the underlying causes of it since research about female offenders is lacking hitherto. It may
happen to appear that the boys and girls in the justice system are more alike in comparison of
being different at the first glance. Both these genders in the justice system are the same in
many aspects, such as being more aggressive, having more mental and health problems, and
tend to experience more risk factors which basically include child abuse or poverty when put
in comparison to the non-offending counterparts of them. Some subtle differences between
both these gender offenders cannot be neglected.
Women offenders have to face various offences and at times even brutality at the hands of the
Police Officers. They are generally looked down upon by the police and hence are treated
with disrespect which also outrages the modesty of the women offenders. A woman who has
been brought in for an inquiry shall only be treated as a suspect and not as a proven offender.
It has been observed that women have to face immense trouble and a disrespectful demeanour
during the process of the inquiry at the police station and the same is continued even after
they have been convicted and sentenced to jail. The police officers tend to use physical force
on these women and this is done by both the male and female police officers. Physical
violence here refers to the intentional use of the physical force which has the potential for
causing a grievous injury, harm, disability, or even death of the person on whom it has been
inflicted upon, it also comprises, hitting, shoving, biting, restraint, kicking, or even the use of
a weapon.
Police officers in most of the cases treat women offenders as a sexual object. Sexual abuse
comprises any kind of a situation where force is used for obtaining participation in any of the
unwanted, unsafe, or a degrading sexual activity. Forced sex is an act of aggression and
violence and even a spouse or an intimate partner with whom consensual sex has occurred
cannot be relieved under this (with an exception in India where rape by the husband, i.e.
8

marital rape is not an offence).This has also been mentioned in the Justice Verma Report.
Women offenders face the situation wherein sexual favours have been asked from them by
the police. They face the sexual abuse at the hands of even the male prisoners (when they
come in contact). Male and female police officers are considered to be insensitive towards
them and treat them with ungracious words and demeanour by looking down upon them. The
police shall deal with the women who have been into human trafficking with immense
patience and not with undue disrespect so that they may get out of the ambit of their trauma
and narrate their part of the story.
Most of the assessment tools and treatment models have not been tested adequately with the
females but were designed and used with the youth in the justice system keeping in mind only
the male offenders. Only with adequate research, the effectiveness of these assessments and
interventions with offending girls can be known. It is imperative that services shall be offered
in the case of female offenders knowing about the high rates of mental health disorders in
them. Girls with conduct disorders are far less likely than their male counterparts to find,
receive, or complete treatment.
Girls are said to experience a multitude of risk factors or often even at higher rates in the
justice system as compared to their male counterparts. Offending girls exhibit higher rates of
mental health problems, exhibit more aggression toward family members and romantic
partners, and suffer more negative consequences from their justice system involvement than
offending boys. Girls who are antisocial are less likely to receive treatment and are accessed
to fewer options of community-based treatment as compared to boys, even if they have an
increased need for such services. Finally, girls who are formally charged are more likely to be
placed in secure confinement than boys in the same situation and to act out violently once
there.
Victimization, in any form, i.e., physical or sexual, and also the emotional aspect is the first
step along a females pathway into this system of juvenile and criminal justice as has been
consistently identified by the research. It has also been considered as a primary source for
determining the types and patterns of typical offenses committed by girls and women. The act
of committing such offences by the women and girls at an early age can be the negative
repercussion as a result of the abuse which they might have suffered in their lives. The
proportion of the girls first entering the juvenile justice system as runaways, for the reason of
escaping abuse at home was high. Ninety-two percent of the juvenile female offenders
9

interviewed in 1998 reported that they had been subjected to some form of emotional,
physical, and/or sexual abuse[xxiv]. It has been observed that the attention paid to female
experiences with crime and delinquency has been reasonably low as it has been generally
associated only with boys.

The ideal interaction of a police officer with a women offender includes the following:
Police personnel shall respect a womans dignity (even though she is an offender) in the
interviews conducted by them and they shall also remain patient during the same.
They shall be attentive to the offenders sense of personal dignity ensure appropriate
covering of their bodies so that it is not immodestly displayed. For example, during your
interview of victims, do not lose sight of the possibility that they may be preoccupied
with their dirty face, disheveled hair, torn clothing, or otherwise undignified
appearance. Provide victims with covering while being careful not to compromise the
collection of any forensic evidence.
The interaction with the victims shall be in calm and a professional manner. The police
officer shall not exhibit his outrage or disgust at the crime as the offender has not been
convicted and without her conviction, she cannot be held guilty of the crime, therefore
shall not be treated ruthlessly like a convicted person.
The women offender shall be put under the charge of a women police officer, who will be
performing the duties of arresting the offender, interviewing and setting up an enquiry,
etc. The arrest of the women offender can only be made by a female officer before sunset,
though a male officer may be present there.
The police shall conduct the interview with the offender with extreme sensitivity.

10

Role Of The Police

It is principally the police who arrests the juvenile and produces him before the Juvenile
Justice Board. It is seldom, that a juvenile is produced by a non-public party or voluntary
organization. Hence, a juveniles first contact with the juvenile justice system is through the
police. A non-public party or voluntary organization producing a juvenile before the Juvenile
Justice Board ought to preferably inform the police regarding such production. Pending
production before Board, the juvenile is to be kept within the Observation Home. Under no
scenario should a juvenile be kept within the police lock-up or jail. The SJPU or juvenile
welfare officer should inform the parent or guardian or any other person of the juveniles
choice regarding the juveniles apprehension. It is the police who investigates a juvenile case,
and submits the charge-sheet before the competent authority and also on completion of
inquiry, accompany the juvenile to the Special Home, or to his place of residence when below
eighteen years of age.
The dispensing of distinct treatment to juveniles as supposed under juvenile legislation is
defeated if the police treat juveniles in the same manner as they treat hardened offenders. So
the Statement of Objects and Reasons of JJA 2000 embody creating special juvenile police
units with a humane approach through sensitization and training of police personnel.
Consequently, JJA 2000 envisages the setting-up of the SJPU in each district and town, and
also the designation of a minimum of one police officer hooked up to a police headquarters as
the juvenile or the child welfare officer. JJA 2000 provides the police the authority to
immediately on apprehension release a juvenile on bail. The same provision was contained in
JJA 1986 and BCA 1948. however the police, but insignificant the crime speculated to have
been committed, do not release a juvenile on bail as they would, an adult, alleged to have
committed a bailable offence. This can be the right practice. In the case of a juvenile it is not
the offence that determines whether or not he ought to be discharged on bail or not, but the
juveniles situation, which can solely be determined by a body having the requisite
experience and assistance. Moreover, the polices call to grant bail is also based on
extraneous reasons, and lead to capriciousness. A juveniles behavior and attitude make a
difference in a police officers use of discretion. A youth who is polite and respectful is more
probable to induce off with a reprimand, whereas a negative and hostile perspective is

11

probably going to lead to a court referral. Welfare of the juvenile is the principle on which all
juvenile systems are based.
Special juvenile police unit includes the law enforcement officials who oftentimes or
exclusively manage juveniles or are primarily engaged within the prevention of juvenile
crime or handling of the juveniles or youngsters under this Act to perform their functions
more effectively; they shall be specially tutored and trained. In every police headquarters a
minimum of one officer with ability and appropriate training and orientation is also
designated as the juvenile or the child welfare officer who can handle the juvenile or the
child in co-ordination with the police. Special juvenile police unit, of which all the law
enforcement officials designated as above, to handle juveniles or youngsters will be
members, may be created in each district and town to co-ordinate and to upgrade the police
treatment of the juveniles and the children.
A lot of jurisprudential ink has flown in the attempt to afford the necessity for the protection
of the children and maintaining the best interest of them and the society, at large.
Undoubtedly, the tender age requires special treatment and the same raises significant
questions with regard to the juvenile justice system in India. The author, in this paper,
attempts to elucidate on this issue highlighting the various provisions in the Juvenile Justice
Act, analyzing the flaws in the law and the gross violation in its implementation. She
highlights the necessity of juveniles being treated properly by the enforcement agencies
including the police officials and authorities at the remand home. Finally, in the light of the
international perspective, she submits certain necessary suggestions that may seen
indispensable in the contemporary scenario.

INTERACTION OF THE POLICE WITH THE JUVENILE OFFENDERS

The first contact that an immature juvenile delinquent has with the juvenile justice system is
with a police official. The nature and state of affairs of this police contact are likely to be
noteworthy and have a long lasting inkling on a young person. Children and juveniles are
involved in a wide range of law violations ranging from status offenses to more grave
offending, and present unique challenges for the policing function. For juveniles, the police
role is said to be especially significant, as young persons view and outlook toward law
enforcement are shaped by their first encounter with a police officer.

12

Juvenile offenders are involved in a strangely hefty number of crimes relative to their fraction
of the population, so they present a special challenge for law enforcement. The role of police
with juveniles is lengthened because they handle many non criminal issue referred to as status
offenses, including running away, curfew violations, and truancy as well as non delinquent
juvenile matters such as neglect, abuse, and missing persons reports. Most metropolitan
police departments have special police units or juvenile bureaus for handling the growing
number of juvenile cases. The job of special juvenile officers include taking missing children
reports; probing runaway cases; investigating juvenile crimes; contacting and interviewing
juveniles, their parents, school officials, and complainants regarding the situation of an
offense; maintaining juvenile records; and appearing in juvenile court.
Juveniles are less knowable than adults, and time and again exhibit fewer respect for the
authority of officers. The infantile behavior of many children and youth means that they are
more at risk to the dares of other youth, and they often engage in unusual behaviour when in
the company of their peers. Many youth view the police officer on guard not as a restriction
to delinquent behaviour, but as a challenge to avoiding detection and confrontation while
loitering at night or engaging in behaviours ranging from petty mischief, to property damage
and sabotage, to more serious crimes of theft and assaults. The immaturity of youth coupled
with limited parental supervision and negative peer pressure presents special problems for
police, who repeatedly encounter juveniles with little respect for law and authority. Juveniles
also present a special trouble for law regulators as they are less mindful of the consequences
of their actions and of the effects of their delinquent behaviour on their victims, their parents
and families, their peers, and themselves.
The problematic nature of dealings between police and young people has time and again been
highlighted in the research works. Interactions between police and young people are often
characterized by disagreement and stress, with high levels of annoyance, fear and mistrust on
both sides. From point of view of young people, there are perceptions of mutually overpolicing in public spaces and under-policing in cases of victimization. Perceptions of racism,
bullying and aggression have also been well-known. Police, on the other hand, are reported to
experience constant hassles and stubborn behavior from young people. In addition, a general
lack of respect for police is often signaled by poor attitudes and demeanor. In short, the

13

typical relationship between young people and police can be characterized as one of negative
perceptions from both sides.
For the police, unfavorable interactions may arise from perceptions that youth are
uncooperative and discourteous of the law and law officers, or from their own experiences of
aggravation, verbal abuse and physical violence directed at them by youth. Mutually negative
perceptions and interactions between police and youth may end up in adverse outcomes for
each party. The negative perceptions held by youth could result in discontentedness with
police as well as a lack of confidence within the police more generally. Poor relationships
with police even have implications for youth. Acting as gatekeepers to the criminal justice
system, police have lots of discretion in their relations with youth. However, negative
perceptions by police towards youth are likely to adversely influence how police apply this
discretion. Attitudes and temperament of the police officer, as well as characteristics of the
juvenile such as gender and indigenous status, and their attitudes, manner and behavior
towards the police are doubtless to impact on police choices once coping with youth. Further,
police discretion could have a major impact on the legislation of youth. Variety of recent
studies indicates that early encounters with police could result in a larger chance of future
encounters with the criminal justice system in later adolescence or adulthood. In short,
negative consequences from police youth interactions are doubtless to strengthen the already
unfavorable attitudes and perceptions that exist between these teams.
Understanding how perceptions and attitudes are formed between police and youth is crucial
to improving these relationships and minimizing any adverse consequences. How youth
understand the police will shape how they interact with law enforcement officers, and their
levels of confidence in, and satisfaction with, police more generally. Similarly, how police
understand youth will largely influence how they plan to answer a youth related incident or
manage a specific scenario. Chiefly, there were often discrepancies in the version of events
provided by youth and that which were provided by police. As an example, youth usually
claimed that police were rude, were verbally or physically aggressive or pestered and targeted
them for trivial offences. On the opposite hand, police usually claimed that it was the juvenile
who was rude, aggressive and uncooperative, or that the alleged behavior failed to occur.

14

Police discretion has been criticized for the rationale that some believe that police abuse their
intensive unrestricted powers, and that they base their choices on extralegal factors apart from
the offense. Extralegal factors are those that have nothing directly to do with the offense for
which the juvenile suspect is being questioned, taken into custody, or in remission. Once
engaged by police, however, youth are presumably to take issue with the manner or way they
perceive treatment by police. Similarly, police conjointly describe things in which they
asseverate it was the juvenile who was rude, uncooperative, or typically showing disrespect
for the police. These findings reinforce the negative attitudes and perceptions in relations
between youth and police.
Relations between police and youth are often represented as problematic. Shaped
considerably by negative attitudes and perceptions from either side and sometimes
characterized by tension, mistrust and conflict, interactions between police and youth have
resulted in adverse consequences for either side, including charges against youth and
complaints against police. Such negative interactions have also served to strengthen the
unfavorable attitudes and perceptions that exist between these 2 groups, thereby perpetuating
a cycle of discontentedness and mistrust.
However, not all interactions between police and youth are preceded by the delinquent or
criminal behavior of youth. And its not solely those kinds of interactions that may result in
adverse consequences or feelings of tension and mistrust. Improving relations between police
and youth wont essentially be complete through a program or intervention alone.
Experiences of young people and police, influences of family and peers, and private beliefs
and attitudes towards each other all facilitate to form perceptions and behaviors. Addressing
those influences that contribute to negative interactions veteran by police and youth will
require a combination of things to come along and be sustained over time.
Under no circumstances is a juvenile to be kept in a police lock-up or jail. This has been the
sentiment of juvenile legislation since the enactment of the children Acts. Separate detection
facilities were established for placement of young offenders under BCA 1948; pending
enquiry they were to be detained in Approved Centers and those found to have committed an
offence were to be kept in Classifying Centers. Distinct establishments for the placement of
juveniles continued under JJA 1986 and Juvenile Justice Act 2000. Reformation and

15

rehabilitation, rather than penalizing the kid, is the essence of juvenile jurisprudence.
Towards this end it is necessary to place the juvenile in a specialized setting where his
development is of paramount importance. If adult wrongdoer and juvenile are kept along
there is a danger of the juvenile being corrupted by hardened criminals or being abused by
them. Is not treatment meted to inmates in police lock-ups and a jail isnt commensurate with
the juveniles age and is probably going to scar him.

16

Juvenile justice in 21st century

The present Juvenile Justice legislation in India has tried to move out of the derogatory
nomenclature and introduced the concept of children in conflict with law and children in
need of care and protection. Although the implementation of the Juvenile Justice Act is
clearly a reflection of the seriousness of the governments attempts to provide spaces for
children and be more child friendly and restorative. However, still the child in conflict with
law continues to be seen as a delinquent with all deliberate intentions to go against the law. In
this orientation we end up undermining the inherent innocence of the child. Thus instead of
having a protecting and a caring attitude towards these children we often take an offence
against them and turn hard in our dealings with these children both during legal and other
rehabilitative activities, thus overlooking the critical need of these children of being looked
after and attended to.
It is important that the children are listened to and their point of view is understood. Above
all, the whole and central issue is to recognize the circumstances of the child which led him
into the undesirable act Juvenile Justice is commonly understood as a notion of fairness and
justice and also an alternative system of dealing with children through laws. The idea of
fairness concerning children is the fundamental ideological premise of juvenile justice, which
ensures that the mental and physical incapability of a child are taken into account. Fairness
and justice not only demands that childrens liability ought to be diminished but also ordains
that they must be subject to protective and restorative measures as are most conducive to their
reintegration into society.
It has been seen that juvenile delinquency is a big problem in India and world over. There can
be no denial to the fact that todays delinquent child if not properly taken care of, will be
tomorrow a criminal. Delinquency amongst children can be controlled before they become
serious threat to the society. The statistics provided by various agencies from time to time
show an upward trend in the incidents of crime by the juveniles. There is need to have a
thorough study of various facts and causes leading to delinquencies, disorderly conduct,

17

vagrancy and conflict of a child with law and also the solution to the problem including
proper protection and rehabilitation of the delinquent child.
No doubt juvenile delinquency is a big problem in India and various laws passed by the
parliament from time to time are fulfilling the objectives to a considerable extent, yet lot of
work is required to be done in order to make juvenile justice system in India a reality. For this
purpose a number of questions are being figured as under: Are the various Child Acts sufficient to tackle the problem of juvenile delinquency in
India?
Are the law executing agencies properly executing the law in favour of the juvenile
delinquents?
Is it dangerous to club the juvenile delinquent with the hardcore criminal, if separated
what physiological, mental changes are likely to flow?
Is the concept of rehabilitation and reformative measures a reality or a hypothecation?
Whether the Supreme Court has to a considerable point succeeded to make the real
objectives of the various Acts in reforming the juvenile delinquent in India?
Whether there is an inflow of juvenile delinquent in India?
Whether the society is a hub of the production of juvenile delinquent in India?
Whether the reformative rehabilitation institutions provided by the Government of India
are sufficient to reform the criminal mind of the juvenile delinquent in India?
In the present research study, an attempt has been made to examine and answer all the above
expected questions. The various issues of this multifaceted problem have been examined
thoroughly in the light of statutory provisions and judicial decisions.

18

CRITICISM
During UPA Government, the Ministry of Women and Child Development started
contemplating bringing several desired amendments in 2011 and a process of consultation
with various stake holders was initiated. A draft Bill in this regard was prepared and was
pending before the Ministry of Law and Justice for scrutiny. Entire process was put to closure
however and no amendment was moved. However after Mrs. Maneka Gandhi took over as
Minister of Women & Child Development under BJP Rule, a draft of new JJ Bill was
suddenly put up on the official website of Ministry of Women & Child Development in June
2014 for public inputs. The Delhi gang rape case in December 2012 had tremendous impact
on public perception of the Act. On of the convicts was found to be juvenile and sentenced to
3 years in a reform home. Eight writ petitions alleging the Act and its several provisions to be
unconstitutional were heard by the Supreme Court of India in the second week of July 2013
and were dismissed, holding the Act to be constitutional. Demands for a reduction of the age
of juveniles from 18 to 16 years were also turned down by the Supreme Court, when
the Union of India stated that there is no proposal to reduce the age of a juvenile.
Many experts and activists viewed post December 2012 Delhi Gang Rape responses as
creation of media sensationalisation of the issue, and cautioned against any regressive move
to disturb the momentum of Juvenile Justice Legislation in the Country. However some

19

sections in the society felt that in view of terrorism and other serious offences, Juvenile
Justice Act of 2000 needed to be amended to include punitive approaches in the existing
Juvenile Justice Law, which so far is purely rehabilitative and reformative. In July 2014,
Indian Express reported that Pakistan-based terrorist organization Lashkar-e-Toiba had asked
its members to declare their age to be below 18 years. This would ensure that they are tried
under the Juvenile Justice Act instead of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The maximum
punishment under the Act is three years. Some argued that there is no need of tampering with
Juvenile Justice Act for putting up effective deterrent against terrorism. Retired Judge of
Delhi High Court, Justice RS Sodhi on 8th August 2015 told Hindustan Times, "We are a
civilised nation and if we become barbaric by twisting our own laws, then the enemy will
succeed in destroying our social structure. We should not allow that but we must condemn
this move of sending children to fight their war"

20

Cases
Juvenile Defendant {Delhi Rape Case}
One of the accused was declared as 17 years and six months old on the day of the crime by
the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB), which relied on his birth certificate and school documents.
The JJB rejected a police request for a bone ossification (age determination) test for a
positive documentation of his age.
On 28 January 2013, the JJB determined that the juvenile would not be tried as an adult. A
petition moved by Janata Party president Subramanian Swamy seeking the prosecution of the
minor as an adult because of the extremely violent nature of his alleged crime was rejected by
the JJB. The minor was tried separately in a juvenile court.
A verdict in the case was scheduled to be announced on 25 July, but was deferred until 5
August and then deferred again to 19 August. On 31 August, the juvenile was convicted of
rape and murder under the Juvenile Justice Act and given the maximum sentence of three
years' imprisonment in a reform facility, inclusive of the eight months he spent in remand
during the trial.

Graham Staines Murder

21

Chenchu Hansda, at 13, was the first accused to be sentenced in the murder of the Australian
missionary Graham Staines and his two young sons, Philip (10) and Timothy (6), in Odisha in
January 1999. Hansda was arrested in April that year and sentenced in June. It would be
another year before the mastermind of the crime, Dara Singh of the Bajrang Dal, was
arrested.
On the night of January 22, 1999, Dara Singh rounded up several followers and descended on
Manoharpur village in Odishas Keonjhar district, where Staines had gone on the occasion of
a festival. Singh reportedly whipped up passions against Staines, who he claimed was
engaged in proselytisation and converting adivasis. Staines had been working in the area for
more than two decades and his work among lepers and the adivasis was well known. Dara
Singh, in contrast, had had a few run-ins with the law, and was accused of several crimes,
including murdering a Muslim trader he accused of cattle smuggling.
Hansda, who lived in the district, was seen by some witnesses after the crime, when the van
used by Staines and his sons lay in a mass of charred ruins. It was this that sealed his fate and
the sentence was read out to him by a special court that read provisions of the Juvenile Justice
Act 1986, in consonance, with the Criminal Procedure Act.
Dara Singh was sentenced to death in 2003, but this was commuted to life imprisonment in
2005 by the Odisha High Court, which also acquitted 11 other accused. This prompted a fresh
appeal against Hansdas sentence. He was now in a remand home and yet it took three years
before he was finally allowed to leave the institution and return to his village in 2008. His
role in the murders, as it appears, could never be clearly established.

22

CONCLUSION
State governments shall ensure and consider juvenile justice system as an integral part of the
training curriculum of the police. It shall be ensured that the treatment of the juveniles by the
law shall be differentiated with the treatment of an adult criminal, and every police personnel
shall also be explained the reason of such a distinct treatment. This can be one of the steps
which may assure a juvenile his rights in the justice system, hence curtailing the ongoing
practice of the police to treat juveniles as adults. This shall be helpful in obtaining the results
of training as to how it changes the perspective of a police officer who religiously believes
that people committing crimes shall to be treated stringently, and punished. Police officers
have to encounter with various delinquent behaviour among the youth, which ranges from
minor to serious crimes. Minor offences involving the order and maintenance function of
enforcement of law is basically for what the police personnel encounters with the juveniles.
Encounter of the police with the juvenile can make a significant difference on the relationship
between the police and the juvenile and also the police with the women regardless of even the
seriousness of the behaviour.
The bad manners used by the police often creates a risk factor for crime for themselves. In
the situation where the police show disrespect towards the suspects and citizens, they receive
the same kind of behaviour from them towards the police and even the law. Juveniles criticize
various practices of the police such as the police stopping to question them, asking them not
loiter on street corners, and various other places, etc. Various other students have ambivalent
23

feelings about police. One of the essential reasons for juveniles negative approach towards
the police are the inevitable result of police personnels just but unpopular restrictions on
young peoples behaviors which are contradicting to law. For the women, it shall be ensured
that women police officers shall be recruited in large numbers and only they shall be
authorized to deal with such offenders. It is strongly believed that the interaction between a
police and a juvenile are a two-way street. How police officers treat the young people is how
they will respond to them and in the same way even the officers often respond in the same
manner to juveniles disrespectful behavior. Working with juveniles and women is a
challenge for the police departments and to do well in this the police personnel shall be
imparted with the cultural awareness training to enhance their skills in working and
interacting with juveniles as well as the women offenders.

24