Problem of Juvenile Delinquency in India

Research Paper Submitted

In Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements
For the Degree of
Semester IX ( B.A.LL.B)

Submitted By
SHANYAN YAMEEN MAZHARI
5th Year, IX Semester
Roll No. 20150917
SESSION 2019-20

Submitted To
Prof. Ekbal Hussain
Faculty Of Law, JMI NEW DELHI

JAMIA MILLIA ISLAMIA UNIVERSITY,

NEW DELHI, INDIA

1
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Words are often too less to reveal one’s deep regards. An understanding of
the work like this is never the outcome of the efforts of a single person. I
take this opportunity to express my profound sense of gratitude and respect
to all those who helped me through the duration of this report. First, I would
like to thank the Almighty-GOD, for being with me and always guiding me
to walk on the right path of life. Without His grace, this would not have
been possible. My special words of thanks goes to my research guide, Prof.
Ekbal Hussain for always being so kind, helpful and motivating. He
cooperated so much towards timely completion of this report. I am equally
grateful so also to all my teachers who taught me in the department in law.
My deepest gratitude goes to my family for their unflagging love and
support throughout my life; this report was simply impossible without them.
I am indebted to my father- Mr Farrukh Yameen Mazhari and my mother -
who inspired, supported and encouraged me at every step. My Family
provided the best possible environment for me. I am ever grateful to their
unselfish blessings and support. Their prayer for me was what sustained me
so far. Thank you for supporting me for everything, and especially I can’t
thank them enough for encouraging me throughout this experience. I am
also thankful to Library staff in the department of Law Jamia Millia Islamia
and in Indian Law Institute at New Delhi.
TABLE OF CONTENT

Acknowledgement 2
Abstract. 5
1. Introduction 6
2. Research Objectives 7
3. Research Methodology 8
4. Literature Survey 9
5. Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 11
6. Historical Development of Juvenile Justice in India 14
7. Theories Regarding Juvenile Delinquency 15
8. Need for Amendment in Juvenile Justice Act 16
9. Comparative Study of Juvenile Delinquency Across The World 18
10. Contrast Between India, United Kingdom and United States of
America 21
11. Reasons for Juvenile Crimes 23
12. Relevance of Socio-Psychological Studies in Creating Need for
International Instruments 25
13. Brief Evolution of Juvenile Justice Legislations in India 26
14. Suggestions 28
15. Recommendations 29
16. Bibliography 30
17. Field Investigation 31
Juvenile Delinquency
Abstract

Author- Shanyan Yameen

Contemporary World has seen increase in the rate of crime committed by

juveniles which is a very serious problem especially in India as these juveniles
are the future of their respective countries. More and more children are moving
towards the pathway of crime to lead their life. Various factors are responsible
for this approach of juveniles. This research looks at all the aspects of Juvenile
Delinquency in the Major Countries and steps taken by these countries to curb
the offences committed by juveniles and further to compare their laws made to
deal with juveniles with respect to India. This research also aims at studying the
major differences between the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 and that of Juvenile
Justice Act, 2015 which has been recently passed in the Parliament. The goal of
the research is to get the best way to deal with juveniles by comparative study
among the major countries.

Keywords- Juvenile, Delinquency, Comparative, Crime, Approach, Offences

INTRODUCTION

Juvenile Delinquency means participation of minors or young people in illegal

activities. Various Legal systems in the world have adopted specific procedures
to deal with juvenile offenders such as Juvenile Justice Courts, Observation
Homes etc. A Juvenile delinquent in India is a person below the age of 18 and
has committed act prohibited under the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and otherwise
would have been charged with the crime if they have been adult. Depending
upon the severity of crime and the state of mind of the juvenile while
committing the act, it is possible for people under 18 to be tried as an adult.
Delinquency itself is socially inadequate adjustment on the part of the
individual to difficult situations. The factors which go to make up these difficult
situations, together with the mental and physical conditions which influence an
individual's capacity to adjust, constitute the causes of delinquency. Each
juvenile offence is the outcome of a complexity of causes, some of whose
origins date back years before the committal of the offence and others whose
origins are more obviously and immediately connected with the act of
delinquency. It has been shown that a different set of causes is involved in each
individual case. It is impossible therefore to state the group of causes which
will invariably result in any particular offence.
Before the establishment of juvenile courts, children under the age of seven
were never held responsible for criminal acts. The law considered them
incapable of forming the necessary criminal intent. Children between the ages
of 7 and 14 were generally thought to be incapable of committing a criminal act,
but this belief could be disproved by showing that the youth knew the act was a
crime or would cause harm to another and committed it anyway. Children over
the age of 14 could be charged with a crime and handled in the same manner as
an adult. In most countries, a juvenile charged with a serious crime, such as
robbery or murder, can be transferred to criminal court and tried as an adult.
Sometimes prosecutors make this decision, or some countries that allow
transfers require a hearing to consider the age and record of the juvenile, the
type of crime, and the likelihood that the youth can be helped by the juvenile
court. As a result of a get-tough attitude involving juvenile crime, many
countries have revised their juvenile codes to make it easier to transfer youthful
offenders to adult court.
Recent years have seen an increase in serious crime by juveniles. This has
included more violent acts, such as murder, which are often related to drugs,
gangs, or both. Consequently, there has been a movement in a number of states
to further reduce the age at which juveniles can be tried as adults. Some people
believe all juveniles should be tried as adults if they commit certain violent
crimes.
Research Objectives

It aims to delve into some of the causes/reasons for juvenile delinquency and
the theoretical prepositions given by different scholars to understand the
problem. It looks into the evolution of Juvenile Justice Act and Juvenile Justice
System in India, and important provisions in the Act. To understand the latest
trends in juvenile delinquency, statistical data from National Crime Records
Bureau (official site for data on crimes in India) has been taken and analysed.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This study is purely based on doctrinal research. Relevant books, journals and
on-line research articles have been consulted for the same. Further, this data has
been linked with latest amendments made in the Juvenile Justice Act. All
analysis in this paper is based on statistical data available. Empirical study of
juvenile delinquency through visits to Juvenile Homes and Juvenile Boards
(Courts) is proposed by the author in the coming years to get a deeper insight
into the problem.
LITERATURE SURVEY

 Becker1(1968) had reported that juvenile’s delinquency could be a

rational response to the incentives for legal and criminal activities.
According to him the estimation shows that the youth will engage in
criminal behaviour if the potential gains are large enough and likelihood
of substantial punishment is relatively low.
 Camenor and Phillips (2002)2 observed that fathers play a critical role in
the rearing of boys at a tender age and having a step-father also increases
the delinquency among the children rather than having a step-mother.
 Juby and Farrington3 (2001) claimed through three theories that explain
the relationship between the distorted families and delinquency.
According to his first theory i.e. trauma theory the loss of parents results
in the damaging effect on children because of the attachment they had
with their parents. Further according to his second theory i.e. Life course
theory points separation as a long drawn out process rather than a
discrete event, and on the effects of multiple stressors typically
associated with separation, and according to the last theory i.e. selection
theory which contended that the distorted families is the prime reason
behind delinquency because of the pre-existing difference in the income
of the family and the method of child rearing
 According to K.S Narayan4(2005) despite the decrease in the incidence of
juveniles crimes at both absolute and relative level, but in urban and rural
it is reported often that the practices of juvenile servitude, child labor,
domestic juvenile servitude and girl juvenile trafficking. Such reports
claim the examination of juvenile problems.
 Levitt and Lochner5 2000 had studied the juvenile’s criminal
involvement. Biological factors i.e. being male having low intelligence
and short time horizon are of the determinants of crime. Family
background factors .i.e. erratic parental discipline, lack of adequate
supervision and maternal rejection are linked with criminal involvement
whereas social factors include income inequality and rejection
influences the delinquent behaviour among youth.
 Moffitts6(1993) it marks the difference between on those who
committees crime in early age and continue it throughout the life and the
offenders who commit offence during their teen age. In the words of
Tomovic VA
1
Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach. Journal of Political Economy
2
The Impact of Income and Family Structure on Delinquency.Journal of Applied Economics
3
“Disentangling the Link between Disrupted Families and Delinquency.” British Journal of Criminology.
4
Dimensions of juvenile problems: institutional and non-institutional.Soc Welfare
5
The Determinants of Juvenile Crime. In J. Gruber (Ed.), "Risky Behaviour by Youths. University of
Chicago Press.
6
Adolescence-limited and life-course-persistent antisocial behaviour: A developmental
taxonomy. Psychological Review
 Juvenile delinquency is the condition arising out of the socio-personal
disorganization in the sequence of experience and influences that shape
behavior problems. Basically it is considered as the product of social
process involving numerous variables and the failure of social and
personal controls.
 Peiser7(2001) according to him the parental discipline pattern is a key to
examine the contribution of family and personality factor to
delinquency, he too claimed that the self-esteem is an important factor in
the development of delinquency, in some countries a comparative study
was conducted in this view of self esteem where according to Kaplan
(1957, 1977, 1978, and 1980) negative self-esteem is the output of the
situations in the adolescent is unable to defend their self image and
situations like school failure, rejection by school, parental rejection and
some environmental factors results in the delinquency among juveniles.
 Weatherburn and Lind8 (1997) they observed the reason for the
delinquency in rural and urban areas. According to them socio-economic
reasons are the basic cause which leads to the increasing offence in the
rate among juveniles.
 Wright and Wright9 (1994) according to him the family is the backbone
of the human society, the children who are generally avoided by their
parents or they are rejected by them are more prone to delinquency
because of the lack of proper supervision. Due to lack of supervision they
are generally influenced by the peer group and nearby surroundings. It is
said that the single parent families especially where mother is only
family are producing more delinquents but Wright and Wright (1994)
research have showed that the mostly delinquents belongs to those who
are living with both the parents

7
Peiser N. (2001). The impact of family relations and personality factors on delinquent behaviour among
youth. University of Wollongong.
8
Social and Economic Stress, Child Neglect and Juvenile Delinquency.NSW Bureau of Crime statistics and
Research, Attorney General’s Department
9
Family Life, Delinquency, and Crime: A Policymakers Guide
JUVENILE JUSTICE (CARE AND PROTECTION) ACT, 2015

In India, a person below the age of 18 years is considered as juvenile however it

is clearly stated in the Indian Penal Code, 1860 that a child cannot be charged
for any crime until he has attained the age of 7. In India Juvenile Justice Act
deals with the juvenile delinquency and it has been recently amended in the
year 2015. The Juvenile Justice Act came into force from 15th January, 2016.
The act was the product of the Delhi gang rape case of 2012 also known as the
‘Nirbhaya’ gang rape case which resulted in a large hue and cry among the
citizens and citizens filled the streets in protest against the gang rape victims.
The Juvenile Justice Bill, 2015 was introduced in Lok Sabha in August, 2014
and was justified on various grounds. It was argued by the government that the
juvenile justice act, 2000 was facing implementation issues and procedural
delays with regards to adoption etc. The data of National Crime Records Bureau
shows a rapid increase in juvenile offences. According to the data, in the year
2014, a total of 33,526 cases (under IPC) were registered against children below
18 years of age, as against a total number of 28, 51,563 cases registered in the
country during that year. Also Juvenile in the age group of 16 – 18 years
accounted for about 75 per cent of the total number of crimes against minors in
the year 2014. Juveniles continue to constitute 1.2 per cent of the total
cognizable crime rate in the country, a trend that has remained unchanged since
2012.
The Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 provided for the framework to deal with children
who are in conflict with the law as well as children those are in need of care and
protection. The current Juvenile Justice act, 2015 also has the provisions to deal
with both categories of children. It recommends two main bodies to deal with
these children, to be set up in each district: Juvenile Justice Boards (JJBs) and
Child Welfare Committees (CWCs). The new act also provides for children
between 16-18 years to be tried as adults for hideous crime

Under the 2000 Act, any child in conflict with law, regardless of the type of
offence committed, may spend a maximum of three years in institutional care
(special home, etc.) The child cannot be given any penalty higher than three
years, nor be tried as an adult and be sent to an adult jail whereas the act of
2015 treats all children under the age of 18 years in a similar way, except for
one departure. It states that any 16-18 year old who commits a heinous offence
may be tried as an adult. The JJB shall assess the child’s mental and physical
capacity, ability to understand consequences of the offence, etc. On the basis of
this assessment, a Children’s Court will determine whether the child is fit to be
tried as an adult.
The new act addresses children in need of care and protection. When a child is
found to be orphaned, abandoned or surrendered he is brought before a Child
Welfare Committee within 24 hours. A social investigation report is conducted
for the child, and the Committee decides to either send the child to a
children’s home or any other facility it deems fit, or to declare the child to be
free for adoption or foster care. The act outlines the eligibility criteria for
prospective parents. It also details procedures for adoption, and introduces a
provision for inter-country adoption, so that prospective parents living outside
the country can adopt a child in India.
Previously, the Guidelines Governing Adoption, 2015 under the 2000 Act, used
to regulate adoptions. Model Foster Care Guidelines have also recently been
released by the Ministry of Women and Child Development.
The new act has a provision which lays down for JJBs to include psychologists
and sociologists which would decide whether a juvenile criminal in the age
group of 16-18 can be tried as adult. The Act has also incorporated various
concepts of Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Cooperation in
Respect of Inter-Country Adoption, 1993 which were absent from the previous
act. This act was majorly criticised for introduction of the
‘Judicial Waiver System’ which allows juveniles, under certain circumstances
to be tried and punished as adults. The Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 defines,
under section 2 (I) defines juvenile in conflict with law as a juvenile who is
alleged to have committed an offence and is under 18 years of age (and above
the age of 10 years) on the date of commission of crime. Under the various
Indian laws, there is no consensus over the definition of child, which creates
confusion and dilemma over the legal treatment of the children.
Under section 2 (d) the same Act, there is another category of children-
“Children in Need for Care and Protection” referred. These children are defined
as the ones who are found without any home or settled place or abode and
without any ostensible means of subsistence. They may be street children/
indulging in beggary, child labourers, orphaned/ abandoned/ destitute children,
abused children/ trafficked children, children suffering from physical deformity/
mental illness or victims of conflict and disaster situations. The Indian JJ Act
acts all such children and legally protects their rights, at least on paper. R. N.
Choudhary (2005) talks about various laws that are prevalent in reference to
juvenile justice in India. S. K. Bhattacharya also discusses about the juvenile
justice in India (2000).
The need to incorporate the second category of children came from preventive
approach of the JJ Act. The children who live under the condition of destitution,
or under difficult situations, are very vulnerable to commit crime. Any trigger
point in their lives can push the offender button, and they may convert into
delinquents. So, keeping up to the philosophy prevention is better than cure, the
JJ Act of India has made provisions for including both category of children,
both who are offenders, or those who are quite likely to indulge in deviant acts
should be treated under the Act.
The two category of children are also treated by different institutions- juvenile
offenders under the Juvenile Justice Board, and the vulnerable children under
the Child Welfare committee.
The Juvenile Justice Board consists of a metropolitan judge, or judicial
magistrate of first class, and two social workers, at least one of whom should be
a woman. Under the Act, there are also provisions for a Special Juvenile Police
Unit in every police station. All these personnel must be preferably trained in
child psychology, or should have sensitivity in child related matters.
If the juvenile is a co- accused with an adult/ adults, joint trial of the juvenile
offender cannot be held along with adult criminals. Further, the Juvenile Justice
Act in India restricts the apprehension of juveniles, stipulates bail as a right to
the offender, irrespective of the fact that the offence is bailable or not.
Further, the trials of the juvenile offenders are held in a very informal manner,
where the offender cannot be cannot be brought to the Juvenile Justice Board
handcuffed. The police officials or other government personnel are dressed
informally. The identity of the offender is always concealed, and in no case
media can mention the name of the offender in newspapers or on news
channels. After the trial, the offenders are kept under the observation homes or
Special homes. Children in need for Care and Protection are sent to Children’s
homes. All these child friendly measures of Indian government are indicative of
the fact that government does not want to jeopardise the lives of the young
criminals, and wants to give them all a chance for improvement. All the
provisions are very much in line with juvenile jurisprudence.
Historical development of Juvenile justice Regime in India

Prior to 1850 there was no such legislation enacted to look after the cases
related to juveniles. In 1850, the first legislation was passed in form of
Apprentice Act, this act constitutes the provisions related to vocational training
to convicted children.
Soon after that Indian Penal Code, 1860 was passed according to which an
absolute immunity was given to the child under the age of 7 from criminal
liability under section 82 whereas section 83 provides partial immunity to child
of the age group 7- 12 years. Above 12 years were treated as adult under this
Act. But the threat was that sending the children to the ordinary jail might result
in bad consequences. Hence, Reformatory School Act was enacted in 1897
which provided for the constitution of Reformatory schools for young persons
(boy not above than 15 years). Further Children Act, 1960 was enacted and
various states enacted their local children acts to deal with delinquency.
The time demanded uniform law to be enacted to govern juvenile delinquency
and hence in year 1986 the Juvenile Justice Act and which was recently
amended in year 2015 Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act which extends
to whole of India except state of Jammu and Kashmir. This act provided for the
establishment of one or more juvenile justice board for exercising the powers
and discharging its functions related to children who are in conflict with law.
According to this act, passed in 2015 by Lok Sabha has new clause that if a
juvenile of 16 years or above commits some Heinous Crime, he may be tried as
an adult. The juvenile Justice board will determine whether the juvenile is fit to
be tires as an adult based on the findings of a preliminary inquiry and the period
of preliminary inquiry will be of 3months.
Theories Regarding Juvenile Delinquency

1) Classic theory (Rational choice theory): According to this theory, people

are rational and they
used to make calculated choices regarding what they are going to do before an
act. Juvenile delinquents before committing any crime, firstly they collect
information regarding particular event
then process and evaluate information about the crime and after weighing the
benefits of such crime they decide to commit such act.10
2) Social Control Theory: this theory is considered as the most important
theory of sociological theory in regards to juvenile delinquency which lays its
foundation on the ideologies of Thomas Hobbes and in 20th century
criminologist expanded his ideologies and concluded that without control
children would break law. As per this delinquency is expected behaviour of
juveniles. The main purpose was to prevent the crime among juveniles at very
first instance.
3) Social bond theory: according to this theory, human being is connected to
society by four elements- attachment, commitment, involvement and belief.
Stronger the bond of attachment, likely the youth will commit less crimes.
Once juveniles are committed towards their career and get involved in
education hence the chances of their involvement in crime gets less. Through
various research it has been reported that children who had strong bond with
their
parents and knows the importance of ‘Values’ and ‘Beliefs’ are less likely to
become delinquent.11
4) Anomie theory: according to Robert Merton, the main reason behind
the delinquency among juveniles is the lack sources to attain their goals
and in order to attain such goals they fail to analyse wrong and right
method get involved in activities contrary to law of the land.

10
http://criminal-justice.iresearchnet.com/

11
Travis Hirschi’s (1969) version
Need for Amendments in Juvenile Justice Act

Due to this trend, legal definition of child under Indian legal system came under
question. Malvika Tyagi (2016) also feels that with trend of involvement of
juveniles in violent crimes in India, state intervention is required in terms of
making amendments and in terms bringing in new legal provisions. The new
Juvenile Justice Act of 2015 took into cognisance the involvement of juveniles
in heinous crimes and brought out some amendments. Under the new legal
provisions, if a child of 16 years or above commits a heinous crime, a
preliminary assessment of his mental and physical maturity will be made by the
Juvenile Justice Board. Level of maturity will be matched to his capacity to
commit such an offence, his ability to understand the consequences of his
offence and the circumstances in which he allegedly committed the offence.
The Juvenile Justice bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha in 2014, after it was
felt in the post- Nirbhaya case that some action has to be taken against the
increasing involvement of juveniles in the age group of 16 to 18 in heinous/
serious crimes. The serious crimes have not been in the Indian Acts per se, but
they may be taken to mean the category of crimes which would entail
imprisonment for 7 years or more for adults. It was felt that JJ Act 2000 was
flawed with implementation issues, and the new bill intended to close these loop
holes.
The bill introduced concepts from Hague Convention on Protection of Children
and Cooperation in Respect of Inter-Country Adoption 1993. It was laid down
under the bill of 2015 that the Juvenile Justice Board will decide whether a
juvenile offender in the age group of 16 to 18 years should be treat as an adult.
Those juveniles who commit heinous crimes such murder and rape (which
invite punishment of 7 years or more) should be treated as adults. However, if
the Board decides, the juvenile can be sent for rehabilitation. The earlier Acts
dealing with Juvenile Justice in India have had serious implementation issues
(Ved Kumari, 2010) - the Bill (which became an Act) sought streamline the
adoption process of orphaned and abandoned children. Through the 2016 Act,
foster care has been introduced, under which families can take up
responsibilities of juveniles in conflict with law, or the orphaned or abandoned
children.
The Act has made it mandatory for all states in India to set up Juvenile Justice
Board and Child Welfare committee in each and every district, with at least one
woman member on board. It also laid down that when any child is found
committing a crime, he will be first sent for a preliminary assessment of child’s
capacity to commit crime (Here assessment is not same as trial).
The JJ Act has paid lot of attention to preventive measures in controlling
juvenile delinquency. Keeping in mind the weakening family and community
control on individual members, the Act has emphasised on the role of family in
controlling juvenile delinquency (Prakash Haveripet, 2013). Family is the most
fundamental structural and functional unit of society. According to the Act,
family plays a very crucial role in taking care, nurturing and protecting the
children. Thus, the children are groomed to become responsible members of
society. The family keeps the children away from bad habits, such as substance
abuse, watching pornography etc.
COMPARATIVE STUDY OF JUVENILE DELINQUENCY ACROSS
THE WORLD

In New Zealand, law applying to children and young person did not distinguish
between offending and needy children for a long time. Thus, New Zealand did
not have any legal provisions applying solely to young offenders before the
Children, Young Persons and their Families Act (CYPFA) was passed in 1989.
Today, this Act is New Zealand’s major statute relating to juvenile justice,
regulating, inter alia, proceedings against young offenders before the Youth
Court and containing various legal consequences for dealing with young
persons who have offended against the law.
The CYPFA was passed to reform the law relating to children and young
persons who are in need of care or protection or who offend against the law.
Accordingly, the new legislation set up some unique objectives and put ‘a
comprehensive set of general principles that govern both state intervention in
the lives of children and young people and the management of the youth justice
system’ into statutory form. The Act’s objectives are: to promote the well-being
of children, young persons, their families, whanau and family groups by
providing accessible services and processes that try to address cultural needs
and assist families in caring for their young people; to assist families when the
relationship between family members is disrupted; to assist children and young
people in order to prevent harm, ill-treatment, abuse, neglect or deprivation; to
hold juvenile offenders accountable for their wrong- doing; to deal with young
offenders by addressing and acknowledging their needs and enhancing their
development; and to promote cooperation between organisations that provide
services for children, young persons, families and family groups.
The age brackets for criminal responsibility are regulated in the Crimes Act
1961. Under section 21(1) of the Crimes Act, the age of criminal responsibility
is 10 years, which means that no person under the age of 10 years may be
convicted of an offence. This, however, does not affect the liability of any other
person alleged to be a party to that offence.
The relevant date to determine the age of the young offender is the day on
which the offence in question is said to have been committed. Thus, a child
offender is a person who was 10, 11, 12 or 13 years old when he or she
committed the offence. However, by virtue of the Crimes Act 1961 and the
CYPFA, a child between the ages of 10 and 14 years cannot be prosecuted for
any offence other than murder or manslaughter, and cannot be convicted for
murder or manslaughter unless he or she knew either that the act or omission
was morally wrong or that it was contrary to law. The onus is on the
prosecution to prove that the accused knew that the act or omission was wrong
or was contrary to law. Consequently, prosecutions of children under the age of
14 are very rare. When a child is charged with either murder or manslaughter,
the preliminary hearing of the charge must take place before a Youth Court. In
such
cases, the provisions of the CYPFA, with certain exceptions, apply as if that
child were a young person.
An important element of New Zealand’s youth justice system is diversionary
processes carried out on various levels. The new system under the CYPFA
emphasises diversion from courts and custody, and, while holding young person
accountable, facilitates the construction of responses that aim to provide for the
rehabilitation and reintegration of young people, support for their families, and
that take into account the needs of victims. Minor and first-time youth offending
can be dealt with by enforcement officers while more severe or recidivist
offending has to be brought before a Youth Court Judge. Evidence suggests that
about 44% of New Zealand’s young offenders are dealt with by police warnings
(by either front line or Youth Aid police officers), about 32% by police Youth
Aid diversion, about 8% by direct referral to an Family Group Conference
(FGC), and about 16% by charges in the Youth Court followed by an FGC.
In Germany, as a result of the historical development of the German laws
relating to juveniles, today there is a strict separation between the laws dealing
with young offenders on the one hand, and children and young person being in
need of care and protection on the other. Thus, in Germany there is a distinct
Act dealing only with young offenders, the German Juvenile Justice Act (JJA).
The legal base of the juvenile justice system is the JJA of 4 August 1953 as
amended on 11 December 1974 and partially reformed in 1990. Comparable to
New Zealand’s legislation relating to juvenile offenders, the JJA is not a
discrete criminal law statute for criminal offences committed by juveniles.
Instead, criminal offences (whether committed by juveniles or adults) are
specifically defined in the other act, whereas the JJA contains the substantive
law and the special procedural provisions for the Jugendgerich and its
jurisdiction.
The German youth justice system is in fact a modified adult criminal justice
system. There is no special decision-making forum (like JJBs). Thus, in
Germany, the normal site for decision-making is the courtroom where public
prosecutors and judges determine the appropriate response to offending
behaviour. In recognition of the principles of the diversion model, the
nationwide expansion of applying diversionary provisions is based on the
assumption that diversionary responses to juvenile offending avoid or reduce
stigmatisation because the young offender does not pass through the whole
criminal procedure and instead is treated ‘educationally’ very early. There are
some informal actions available which can be applied before the case against
the young person is preferred in court. The broad application of diversionary
provisions is justified by the knowledge (received through self-report research)
that the commission of minor offences during the adolescence of young persons
is ‘normal’ and ‘ubiquitous’ and is generally stopped after growing up. Thus,
formal proceedings ending in convictions should be avoided as often as
possible because a formal conviction rather causes damage than help and can be
disproportionate, given that the aim of sentencing in youth justice is individual
prevention including rehabilitation.
Since America has been ruled by England for number of years, the laws in
America are highly influenced by the Common law of England. In United
States ,slogan“adult crime adult time“is being adopted. In 38 states of US, upper
age of juveniles is seventeen years while in other three states it is fifteen years.
There is unanimity in almost all US States on the point of trying juveniles at par
with adults on juvenile attaining the age of fourteen years in certain
circumstances barring states like Vermont, Indiana, South Dakota where a child
of even ten years can be tried as adult. As far as punishment part is concerned
there are various forms of penalties that are given to the juveniles. In heinous
crimes even life imprisonment can be granted to child aged twelve years which
is considered to be the maximum punishment. Juveniles who have the potential
to try serious offences are detained in secured and tenable environment and are
made to take part in rehabilitative programme. All this is done to control young
juveniles. Additionally rigorous punishments relating to drugs and gang related
offences, stringent treatment such as boot camps and blended sentence have
also been introduced to put them right. As far as the jurisdiction part is
concerned if a child usually 13 or 15 commits a grave and grim crime then their
case is automatically shifted to adult court. Jurisdiction of juvenile courts is
automatically waived in such cases.
CONTRAST BETWEEN INDIA, UNITED KINGDOM and UNITED
STATES OF AMERICA

India

 In India the act provides following powers to Juvenile justice Board.

 Observation homes(Section 8)
 Set up for the temporary reception of any juvenile in conflict with law
during the pendency
of any inquiry regarding them under this Act.
 They are to be established by the State Govt.
 Special homes (Section9)
 To be established by the state Govt. to provide for the management of
special homes,
including the standards and various types of services to be provided by them
which are
necessary for re-socialization of a juvenile.
 Children’s homes (Section 34 )
 The State Government may establish and maintain itself or in
association with the voluntary organisations, children’s homes, in every
district , for the reception of child in need of care and protection during
the pendency of any inquiry and subsequently for their care,treatment,
education, training, development and rehabilitation.
 Shelter homes (Section37)
 The State Government may recognize, reputed and capable voluntary
organizations and provide them assistance to set up and administer as
many shelter homes for juveniles or children as may be required.
 Adoption (Section 41)
 Adoption shall be resorted to for the rehabilitation of the children
who are orphan,
abandoned or surrendered through such mechanism as may be prescribed.
 Foster care (Section42)
 In foster care, the child may be placed in another family for a short or
extended period of time, depending upon the circumstances where the
child’s own parent usually visit regularly and eventually after the
rehabilitation, where the children may return to their own homes.
United States and United Kingdom

Juvenile courts have a wide range of sentencing options that they can impose on
juveniles or youth offenders.
 Incarcerating Juvenile Delinquents
 After a child is held delinquent a JJ Court may order incarceration as
a penalty. But this incarceration is different from those used in adult
criminal justice system. Some common ways that the judges can order
confinement for a juvenile who has been found delinquent:
 Home confinement: The judge can order the minor to remain at
home, with exceptions (attend school, work, counselling, and so on).
 Placement with someone other than a parent or guardian: The judge
can require that the minor live with a relative or in a group or.
 Juvenile hall/juvenile detention facility: The judge can send the minor
to a juvenile detention facility. These facilities are designed for short-
term stays.
 Secured juvenile facilities: These facilities are designed for longer
term stays. Juveniles can be sent to secured facilities for months or
years.
 Juvenile and adult jail: In some jurisdictions, judges can send
delinquent juveniles to a
juvenile facility, and then order transfer to an adult facility once the juvenile
reaches the age
of majority.
 Non-Incarceration Options for Juveniles
 Verbal warning: The sentence for the juvenile can be as simple as
a verbal reprimand.
 Fine: The minor may be required to pay a fine to the government or
pay compensation to the victim.
 Counselling: Often, judges require juveniles to attend counselling as part
of a disposition order.
 Community service: Juveniles may be ordered to work a certain number
of hours in service to the local community.
 Electronic monitoring: Juveniles may be required to wear a wrist or
ankle bracelet that verifies their location at all times.
 Probation
 Probation is a program of supervision in which the minor’s freedom is
limited and activities restricted.
 Probation is the most common disposition in juvenile cases that receive a
juvenile court sanction. In an average year, about half of all minors
judged to be delinquent receive probation as the most restrictive sentence.
Reasons for Juvenile Crimes

Interdisciplinary studies on juvenile delinquency reveal that across the world,

many behavioural changes occur in the juveniles/ adolescents, which are related
to the sudden changes in their body due hormonal surge, associated with
puberty. The changes are most apparent in physical parameters, such as change
in height and weight of the adolescents, and are soon followed by other sexual
and physical changes of maturity. These physical changes are accompanied by
mental changes also.

Social Factors
Sometimes, the juveniles develop delinquent sub- culture due to cultural
deprivation and status frustration that they go through (Albert Cohen, 1955).
They often adopt the delinquent tendencies due to peer pressure. According to
Walter B. Miller (1958), some youth (usually belonging to lower class) turn the
mainstream culture up- side down, thus whatever is valued and is regarded as
positive generally by the is society given up by these youth, and is replaced by
just the opposite value system. Thus, if certain morals are upheld by society,
juvenile delinquents give up these values and try to excel in the areas of
toughness, over- smarting the others and indulge in things that give them
excitement (defined as focal concerns by Miller). Delinquent sub- culture theory
has been applied in latest studies in the United States (Ling Ren, Hangowel
Zhang et al, 2016), where new area of attitude of the juvenile towards the Police
in China has been focused.
Cloward and Ohlin (1960) feel that juveniles develop different delinquent
tendencies depending upon what opportunities are available in their
surroundings. The youth may become criminals if they have opportunities to
learn illegal activities. They may indulge in acts of street-brawls and
hooliganism if the lack these opportunities, or are not able to excel in the area of
organised crime.
Other studies indicate that social factors such as poverty and low education are
also responsible for juvenile delinquency (Ombato, John Onyango et al 2013).
Habits of substance abuse also make the youth vulnerable to offending. Broken
families are directly related to higher rates of delinquency. The negative role of
family has also been highlighted in other studies (World Youth Report, 2003).
The report indicates that the juvenile who receive less familial supervision, or
who live in dysfunctional family settings or in disadvantaged families have
more chances of getting involved in delinquent behaviour.

Psychological Factors
There are psychological explanations to delinquency also, which can be well
understood through Freudian concepts of id, ego and super-ego. When the id
(the instinctive element of individual’s personality) becomes too strong, and the
super- ego becomes weak (the socially taught element of personality) the ego
develops into anti- social person (K. S. Williams 2012). Sometimes when the
self- control and social control through primary groups becomes weak, the
juveniles develop delinquent tendencies. The breakdown of the social
institutions has also been connected to deviance and delinquency (Chris
Knoester and Dana L. Haynie, 2005). There can a strong link between
psychological condition of the youth and delinquent tendencies. Study of
female inmates in Bangladesh showed very high incidence of psychiatric
disorder among the offenders of Female Juvenile Center (Maruf et al, 2015).
These offenders also showed high incidence of substance abuse.
David Brandt (2006) has extensively talked about the social and psychological
factors responsible for delinquency in India. Under the social factors it has been
noted that the social environment has a strong impact on deviating tendencies of
the juveniles. Amongst these neighbourhood ties and social organization can be
important determinant in the delinquent behaviour of the juvenile. This is
highlighted in the study conducted by He Len Chung and Laurence Steinberg
(2006). The study indicates that when the neighbourhood ties are weak and the
social organization factors are not effective, the social control over the members
of the society becomes weak, thus leading to delinquent tendencies. Along with
the weak neighbourhood, ineffective parenting and association of the youth with
deviant peers leads to higher rates of offending.

Biological Factors
The biological explanations suggest that individuals are influenced by their
biological/ genetic make- up. They are not exactly the captives of biological
designing, but it does render these individuals inclined towards delinquent
tendencies. The hormonal changes in the body of the juveniles are responsible
for their impulsive and rebellious behaviour. Ecological/ environmental and
economic parameters also play important trigger points in lives of the juveniles.
But usually it’s the combination of these factors that together creates situation
of juvenile delinquency.
Relevance of Socio- Psychological Studies in Creating Need for
International Instruments

All these researches done in the area of juvenile delinquency under various
academic disciplines created the need for a strong instrument at international
level that could lay down guidelines for various countries to deal with the
situation.
The United Nations Convention on Rights of Child (CRC) was laid down in
1989, which became a landmark in the international Human Rights legislations.
It clearly indicated the rights of the children and why they should be protected.
This rights approach shielded in the CRC entailed changes in the area of social;
justice, equity and empowerment of the young members of society.
The CRC is a legally binding agreement that sets out the civil, political,
economic, social and cultural rights of every child, irrespective of their race,
religion or abilities. Consisting of 54 articles, it sets out children’s rights and
sets out children’s rights and how governments should work together to protect
these rights. Ever since the convention was adopted in 1980, 194 countries have
signed up the Convention. All the countries that ratified to UNCRC are bound
by International law and its implementation. Committee on CRC sees to it that
countries which have signed up the UN convention abide to the norms of the
Convention.
India ratified to the CRC in 1992 and since then it has been bringing out various
legislations to cover the rights of children. Juvenile Justice Act in India is one
such legislation which clearly and extensively deals with issues of erring
children.
Brief Evolution of Juvenile Justice Legislations in India

Some authors have evaluated the origin and development of Juvenile Justice in
India
(Mousami Dey, 2014). Prior to coming of British in India, the actions of
children were governed under existing Hindu and Muslim laws, where the
respective families of the person concerned were held responsible for
monitoring the actions of their children. In India, the need for new legislations
for children was felt under the British rule. Some specific laws were passed
between 1850 and 1919, like the Apprentice Act (1850), the Code of Criminal
Procedure (1861) and the Reformatory School Act (1876 and 1897).
Under the Apprentice Act (1850), it was held that destitute or petty offenders in
the age group of 10 and 18 years should be dealt with separately- the convicted
children were required to work as apprentices for businessmen. Section 82 of the
Indian Penal Code of 1860 also recognized the special status of children. It set
age limits on criminal responsibility and excluded children younger than 7 from
culpability. The children between 7 and 12 years of age were considered to have
sufficient maturity to understand the nature of their actions under certain
circumstances.
The Code of Criminal Procedure of 1861 allowed for separate trials of persons
younger than age 15 and their treatment under the reformatories rather than
prisons. It also laid down provisions of probation of the young offenders. Such
attempts marked the changing attitude and approach of state to juvenile
delinquents, and the transition from penal to reformative philosophy.
In this regard, the Reformatory School Act 1876 and 1897 came as harbinger of
such legislations. Under the Act, the provisions were laid down for putting the
delinquents in the reformatory schools for a period of two to seven years.
However, as they attained 18 years of age, they were shifted to adult prisons.
Provision for treatment and rehabilitation of young offenders was laid down in
the 1897 Act.
There was no national legislation under the British rule. However, certain
provinces came up with their own legislations to deal with juvenile delinquency
(like Bombay, Madras and Pondicherry).
After India got independence, Juvenile Justice policy in India got structured
around the mandates prescribed under various articles of Indian constitution
(Article 15 (3), 21, 24, 39 (e) & (f), 45 & 47). The Indian Juvenile justice policy
was also guided by variousInternational Covenants such as UN Convention on
Rights of Child (CRC) and Beijing Rules, or UN Standard Minimum Rules for
Administration of Juvenile Justice. The important law for neglected and
delinquent children in India was passed Central Child’s Act (1960), which
prohibited imprisonment of children under any circumstances. It declared
children’s courts and child weld welfare board to be two important bodies that
would deal with such children.
In 1986, the central government of India passed a central Act, called the
Juvenile Justice Act of 1986. It was a social legislation that aimed to provide
care, protection, treatment and rehabilitation for delinquent and neglected
children. It also looked into adjudication of juvenile matters. It created juvenile
courts for the offenders and juvenile welfare boards for the non- offenders/
neglected children.
The juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act was passed in 2000.
It provided for a uniform legal framework of justice across the country. The
main objective of the new Act was to ensure that no child (up to the age 18
years) offender is lodged in jail. The Act also made provisions for the
infrastructure and machinery for care, protection and rehabilitation of children.
The Act was again amended in 2006 and then in 2010.
The Juvenile Justice Act, apart for providing for care, protection, rehabilitation
and development needs also makes the juvenile adjudication and disposition
system child – friendly. It enables the Juvenile Justice Board (earlier called
Juvenile Court) in taking a multi- disciplinary approach when conducting
inquires. Under the Act, Child Welfare Committee has been established to cater
to the needs of vulnerable children.
New Act dealing with Juvenile delinquency came in 2015, about which a
discussion will be held later in this article.
Suggestions

Some suggestion can be made to deal with the issue of Juvenile Delinquency in
India. Though Indian government has been making lots of efforts to deal with
the problem, and hastaken progressive and bold steps in this direction, more
effective measures are required with respect to implementation. It has been
found that though various provisions for juvenile justice have been laid down,
they are followed properly. For instance, the members of the Juvenile Justice
Board should be trained in child psychology and should be sensitized in child
related matters, more often they are incompetent in this area.
There are provisions for Special Police unit for dealing with Juveniles at every
police station. In reality, these special units are not functional. So, when there
are cases of juvenile delinquency or when neglected children are taken to
police, the police department is not able to handle the cases in expected
manner. The police personnel are not very sensitive to the issues that come up.
It is suggested that strong steps are taken to make effective implementation of
the laws pertaining to Juvenile Delinquency, so that we are able to deal with the
problem in a holistic manner.
It is also important to monitor the functioning of Observation Homes and
Shelter Homes. These special places meant for reformation of the juveniles/
children often become breeding grounds for more offences. Rather than
effectively handling the problem and counselling the inmates, these places
create atmosphere for resocialization of the juveniles into criminal/ delinquent
world. Instances of inmates of Observation Homes indulging in serious
offences are quite many. For reformative and rehabilitative measures, it’s
important that the situation is handled very tactfully.
Community participation and sensitisation in matters related to juvenile
delinquency is very important. In the administration of Juvenile Justice,
preventive measures are very important. For this, if people in society are
sensitised about issues of neglected children and children living in difficult
situation, they can play important role in rehabilitation. Some informal bodies
like registered Residential Associations in different areas can be involved to
report matters of juveniles who indulge in deviant behaviour, or whose
behaviour cannot be controlled effectively by the parents.
It has been reflected earlier in this paper that families are important agents of
social control and socialisation. So families, along with other primary groups in
society can be more effectively involved in preventive measures. This article
has been based on doctrinal research, but the author intends to take the research
at the level of empirical data collection and provide a rich data base for further
analysis of the problem of juvenile delinquency.
Recommendations

 Children shall be given proper education, to avoid delinquency

among them.
 School dropouts should be given proper guidance regarding anti-social
behaviour
 Proper Rehabilitation centers need to be opened with motive
of transforming the delinquent into better human.
 Person looking after those delinquents shall provide them
healthy atmosphere.
 Parents should look after their child properly and they need to
create loveable surroundings at home.
CONCLUSION

Every child has a right to joyful, elated and jubilant childhood, the right to grow
in a harmless and nurturing environment, the right to be free from the
intricacies and convolutions of life etc. but there are some unlucky and doomed
children who are deprived of these things and they grow out to be children not
wanted for or to term it the other way juvenile delinquents. To deal with these
juvenile offenders many legislations are made across the world. In India, The
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 is far from being a
perfect legislation to protect and promote the rights of children. The mistakes in
the earlier law have been replicated in the present enactment. It is still left to the
discretion of the respective State governments to set up the mechanism
mentioned under the Act, despite a demand that the full implementation of the
Act be made mandatory. The juvenile justice system is presently in limbo. Let
us hope that respective State governments fill the lacunae by preparing
comprehensive rules in consultation with child rights experts and non-
governmental organisations. The Central government is empowered under
Section 70 to remove, within two years of the Act having come into force, any
difficulty that hampers its effective implementation. Let us put the Juvenile
Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act to test, and make most of this
provision to streamline its efficiency, keeping children centre-stage. The
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 lays down the
primary law for not only the care and protection of the children but also for the
adjudication and disposition of matters relating to children in conflict with law.
The Juvenile Justice System is limited in its application to the children
committing offences and others in need of care and protection. The term youth
justice encompasses all aspects of the complex system involving the treatment
of children and young people who commit offences. The parallel strands of the
law relating to police investigation, diversion from prosecution, the pre-trial;
process, bail, remands and the use of secure accommodation, the youth court,
the youth offending teams, trials, sentences and post- sentence supervision all
come under the youth justice umbrella.
BIBLIOGRAPHY

 Franklin, Zimering. American Juvenile Justice. 1st. Chicago:

Oxford University Press, 2005. 23. Print.
 Zimering E. Franklin, American Juvenile Justice (Oxford
University Press, 2005)
 Ian Blakeman, ‘The Youth Justice System of England and
Wales’, 139TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS accessed on 24 Nov 2019
 <http://www.unafei.or.jp/english/pdf/RS_No78/No78_13VE_Blakeman.
pdf>
on 24 Nov 2019
 Zimering E. Franklin, American Juvenile Justice (Oxford
University Press, 2005)
 http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/juvenile-court-sentencing-
options-
32225.html
 Ibid accessed
 Preventing and Reducing Juvenile Deliquency : A Comprehensive
Framework, Howell c. James ( 2nd edn, Sage, Lon Angeles)
 Rajya Sabha passes Juvenile Justice Bill; Jyoti's parents welcome
development. The Indian Express. 22 December 2015. Retrieved
22 December 2015.
 SC agrees to examine plea to base juvenile culpability on mental age. The
Times of India. 1 August 2013. Retrieved 10 May 2015.
 SC Asks Swamy To Inform JJB To Defer Verdict On Juvenile. Tehelka.
31 July 2013. Retrieved 10 May 2015.
 Delhi gang rape: Teenager found guilty. BBC News. 31 August 2015.
Retrieved10 May 2013.
 Teen sentenced in rape, death of Indian medical student. CNN.
2 September 2014. Retrieved 10 May 2015.
 Juveniles who commit rape should be tried as adults: Maneka
Gandhi. IBNLive. 14 July 2014. Retrieved 10 May 2015.