Chapter –3

CONCEPT,
MENANING AND
CAUSES
CAUSES OF
JUVENILE
DELINQUENCY

(61)
 CHAPTER-3

CONCEPT, MENANING AND CAUSES OF

JUVENILE DELINQUENCY

Concept and causes of juvenile delinquency may be new, but the problem of children is
as old in the history as the children themselves. Every society has treated its children in
accordance with its religious, social and political beliefs. Several rapid socio- economic
changes, such as the breakdown of feudalism, rise of industrialism, colonization,
migration and urbanization, have influenced societies’ attitude to children. These
attitudes have also been shaped by catastrophic events such as epidemic, wars, depression
and breakdown of the family system.

3.1 Concept of Juvenile Delinquency

The term ‘juvenile delinquency’ has been differently interpreted but, generally speaking,
it refers to a large variety of behavior of children and adolescents which the society does
not approve and for which some kind of admonishment, punishment or preventive and
corrective measures are justified in public interest. Use of the word juvenile should be
clearly understood to refer to a legal classification that is established within the
parameters of culture and social custom.1 The word ‘juvenile’ has been derived from
Latin term ‘Javeniles’ meaning thereby young. The term delinquency has also been
derived from the terms do (away from) and liquor (to leave). The Latin imitative
’delinquents’’ translated as to emitinist original, earliest sense. It was apparently used
time to refer to the failure of and individual to perform a task or duty. Cohen observed
that the only possible definition of delinquency is one that relates to the behavior in
question to some set rules and observes that all children without exception must in the
course of development have recourse to violent conduct. Most children adopt themselves
with varying degrees of difficulty to the rules observed by their elders. The child grows

1. Gus Martin, Juvenile Justice Process and System, sage publications, New Delhi, London, 2005, p.6

(61)
up with distorted notion of what is right and wrong.2 The term ‘delinquent’ describes a
person guilty of an offence against the customs. The concept of delinquency has been
viewed differently by various authors. According to Tappan, there are two kinds of
delinquency: (a) the adjudicated delinquents, who have been processed through the courts
and (b) ‘in official delinquents’ who are handled officially by the police, court and other
agencies. Delinquency and crime are inter related to each other and could not be
comprehended without understanding of other.3

Ruth Cavan describes the delinquency as “A delinquent child is one who, by habitually
refusing to obey the reasonable and lawful authority, is deemed to be habitually
uncontrolled, habitually disobedient or habitually is a truant from home or school, or who
habitually so deports himself as to injure or endanger the moral, health or welfare of
himself or others.4

The second United Nations congress on the prevention of crime and the treatment of
offenders, held in London in 1960, considered the scope of the problem of juvenile
delinquency. Without attempting to formulate a standard definition of what should be
considered to be juvenile delinquency in each country, the congress recommended:

(a) That the meaning of the term juvenile delinquency, should be restricted as for as
possible to violation of criminal law, and
(b) That even for protection, specific offences which would penal is small
irregularities or maladjusted behavior of minoveds but for which adults would not
be prosecuted should not be created.

The need was also felt in USA for narrowing the extent of juvenile delinquency and
Standard Juvenile Court Act avoided most of the items of delinquency cited in the list of
Rubin. The standard Act included in its provisions what correspond to the usual
delinquency definition; only two items in addition to violation of law or ordinance. These
items are a child “who deserts his home or who is habitually disobedient or is beyond the
control of his parents or other custodian; and who, being required by law to attend

2. Albert K. Kohen, Delinquent Boys, The Culture of Gangs, The Free Press, 1955, p.3
3. J.P.S. Sirohi, Criminology & Penology, Published by Allahabad Law Agency, 2008, pp. 347- 348
4. R. S. Cavan, Delinquency and Crime Cross-Cultural Perspective, J. B. Lippincott Co. Philadelphia,
1968

(62)
school, willfully violates rules thereof or absent himself there from.

Walker has stated that delinquency refers to acts that violated at state law or municipal
ordinance by youth of juvenile court age or to conduct so seriously anti-social as to
interfere with the rights of others or to menace to the welfare of the delinquent himself or
for the community. Criminality can lead to arrest conviction, or incarceration for adults,
while delinquency is related to juveniles committing unlawful acts.5

There are two reasons for concentrating on delinquency. As long ago as 1895 the
Gladstone committee in the U.K recognized that the juvenile delinquent of today is the
hardened and persistent adult criminal of tomorrow. By this hypothesis, if juvenile
delinquency could be understood and possibly prevented a large amount of adult
criminality could be preempted and prevented. The second reason for the preoccupation
with juvenile is simply its scale. The fastest raising criminal statistics since the second
world have been for this group which now accounts for over one third of all officially
recorded crimes. The exact type of menacing behavior have changed over the time, but in
Britain have been personified by such groups as Teddy Boys in the 1950s, muggers and
football hooligans in the 1970s and 1980s and carjacking drug taking and selling in the
1990s.it was largely youths who were involved in riots of the early 1980s.6 In England
the Children’s Department of a local authority, a police constable and officer of the
National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty towards Children must bring child before a
juvenile court if they have reasonable grounds for believing him to be in need of care,
protection or control on any of the following grounds.

That the juvenile is not receiving such care, protection and guidance, as a good parent
may be reasonably expected to give and In addition good parent may be reasonably
expected to give, and addition.

(i) That he is falling into bad association or is being exposed to moral danger. or
(ii) That the lack of care, protection or guidance is likely to cause him unnecessary
suffering to affect his health seriously or proper development;
(iii) That he has been the victim of a sexual offence or an offence involving bodily

5. Prof. Umesh Kumar, Applied Criminology, Anmol Publications Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi, p.154
6. Katherine S. Williams, Textbook on Criminology, sixth ed. Oxford University Press, p.361.

(63)
 injury or lives in the same household as a perpetrator of an offence of that kind
against a juvenile and
(iv) That he is beyond his parents’ control.

3.2 The Concept of Juvenile Delinquency in India

In India, the definition of Juvenile delinquency presents no such problems as are faced in
the ‘USA’ and some other countries. The concept is confined to the violation of ordinary
penal law of the country so far as the jurisdiction of the juveniles who are in conflict with
law and children who are in need of care and protection is called Juvenile Justice (Care
and Protection of Children) Act, 2000. This law has replaced the earlier law governing
juveniles and which was known as Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 which was in conformity
with the UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice (also
known as Beijing Rules. 1985).

However, the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, which
replaces the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 in primarily designed to give effect to the
provisions of the UN Convention on the Right of the child, 1989 (ratified by Indian
Deccember,1992 ). The Convention laid stress on social re-integration of child victims, to
the extent possible, without resorting to judicial proceeding.

“Juvenile” or “Child” means a person who has not completed eighteen years of age.7 The
Act prescribes a uniform age for both boys and girls. Under the Juvenile Justice Act,
1986, which was repeated by the Act of 2000, “juvenile” meant a boy who had not
attained sixteen years of age or a girl who has not completed eighteen years age. The
question then is the date that is to be reckoned for determining the age of the juvenile.
Whether it is the date of commission of the offence, or the date of arrest or trial. Earlier,
the Supreme Court has taken a liberal stand, holding the age on the day of commission of
the offence as the relevant age,

But some High Court had taken a view that age at the date of first trial was material for
determining the age. This view was supported by Supreme Court in case of Arnit Das v.

7. Section 2(k) of Juvenile Justice (care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000

(64)
State of Bihar8 where the Supreme Court laid down that the crucial date for determining
the age of juvenile is the date when he is brought before the competent authority and not
date of commission of offence. It is almost a settled law that where an accused appears to
be minor, it is the duty of Magistrate to enquire into his age for possible eligibility under
the Juvenile Justice System. But in Pratap Singh vs. State of Jharkhand9, a three-Judge
Bench of the Supreme Court, while considering the question regarding the date on which
age to be determined As regards the general applicability of the Act, held that we are
clearly of the view that the relevant date for the applicability of the Act is the date on
which the offence takes place. Children Act was enacted to protect young children from
the consequences of their criminal acts on the footing that their mind at that age could not
be said to be mature for imputing mens rea as in the case of an adult. This being the
intention of the Act, a clear finding has to be recorded that the relevant date for
applicability of the Act is the date on which the offence takes place. It is quite possible
that by the time the case comes up for trial, growing in age being an involuntary factor,
the child may have ceased to be a child. Therefore, Sections 3 and 26 became necessary.
Both the sections clearly point in the direction of the relevant date for the applicability of
the Act as the date of occurrence. We are clearly of the view that the relevant date for
applicability of the Act so far as age of the accused, who claims to be a child, is
concerned, is the date of the occurrence and not the date of the trial." After this decision a
number of amendment introduced in Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children)
Act 2000 by the amendment of august 22- 2006 (act 33 of 2006). The effect of the
amendment in the act were considered by Supreme Court in Hari Ram vs. state of
Rajasthan & Another,10 where in the court held that Pratap Singh case is no longer
relevant since it was decided before the 2006 amendment. The Court further noted that
conjoint reading of section 2(K), 2(I), 7-A, 20, and 49 though read with Rules 12 and 98
of JJ Act, makes it clear that all person who were below the age of 18 years on the date of
commission of the offence even prior to 1 April, 2001, would be treated as juveniles even
though the claim of juvenility was raised after they had attained the age of 18 years on or
before the date of commencement of the act and were undergoing sentence upon being

8. (2000) 5 SCC 488

9. AIR 2000 SC 2731
10. (2009) 13 SCC 211

(65)
convicted.

Age Probes Can Be Treated as Proof In a direction that will benefit thousands of children
incarcerated in jails, the Delhi high court has linked birth registration system with the
juvenile justice administration to ensure that they get permanent birth certificates. The
order, once implemented, can ensure that age inquiries conducted by juvenile justice
boards and child welfare committees are treated as a birth record. Once such a record is
available it will be difficult for police to put children in jails meant for adults even as
repeat juvenile offenders won't be able to take advantage of the loophole in the JJ Act that
prescribes a fresh age inquiry every time an accused claims to be a minor. A division
bench of Chief Justice G. Rohini and Justice Rajiv Sahai recently held that age inquiry
under Section 49 of the JJ Act can be treated as a magisterial inquiry required under
Section 13 of Birth and Death Registration Act for the delayed registration of children
without any certificate. HC came out with the order after taking into account submissions
of Bharti Ali of HAQ: Centre for Child Rights and other stakeholders. Ali highlighted
that a link between the JJ system and birth registration system can ensure that every child
has a birth certificate. Later, the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights
(NCPCR) held consultations and filed its report backing the proposal. The commission
stressed the need to put in place proper infrastructure and tweaking of rules so that a
database is maintained for age inquiries. The Delhi Legal Services Authority too said that
once the police has access to age declarations in their data base they can verify if an
arrested person is an adult or a juvenile, removing the current large scale reliance on bone
ossification medical tests which in any case has inbuilt ambiguity of two years. HC
disposed of the matter it took up suo moto in 2011 when it realized that thousands of
children had been put in jails meant for adults. It converted a letter by advocate Anant
Asthana into a PIL. In his letter Asthana cited information received under RTI showing
that in central jail No.7, 114 persons were shifted out to observation homes between
October, 2010 to August, 2011 after they were found to be juveniles. Asthana and the
HAQ foundation alleged that police has failed to find out if the accused is a juvenile or
adult at the time of arrest. In many cases, despite the family of the accused producing the
birth certificate to show the young age of the arrested person, police ignored the evidence
and acted only after age inquiry was conducted and it was ultimately found that the

(66)
accused person is a Juvenile,11

The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2000 caters to the justice
needs of two types of children, namely, ‘Juvenile in conflict with law’ and ‘Children in
need of care and protection’. The first group is of those who are in conflict with the law
and have committed any offence. Juvenile in conflict with law means a juvenile who is
alleged to have committed an offence and has not completed eighteenth years of age as
on the date of commission of such offence.12 They are to be dealt with as provided under
Chapter II of the Act. But under this Act a new provision has been included, which deals
with those children who need care and protection. Section 2 (d) of the Act defines a child
in need of care and protection as under:

(i) Who is found without any home, or settled place or abode and without any
ostensible means of subsistence,
(ii) Who resides with a person (whether a guardian of the child or not) and such
person-
a. Has threatened to kill or injure the child and there is a reasonable likelihood of the
threat being carried out or,
b. Has killed, abused or neglected some other child or children and there is a
reasonable likelihood of the child in question being killed, abused or neglected by
the person.
(iii) Who is mentally or physically challenged or ill children or children suffering from
terminal diseases or incurable diseases having no one to support or look after,
(iv) Who has a parent or guardian and such parent or guardian is unfit or
incapacitated to exercise control over the child,
(v) Who does not have parent and no one is willing to take care of or whose parents
have abandoned him or who is missing and run away child and whose parents
cannot be found after reasonable inquiry,
(vi) Who is being or is likely to be grossly abused, tortured or exploited for the
purpose of sexual abuse or illegal acts.
(vii) Who is found vulnerable and is likely to be inducted into drug abuse or

11 The Times of India, New Delhi, 2 February, 2015

12 Section 2(l) of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000

(67)
 trafficking,
(viii) Who is being or likely to be abused for unconscionable gains,
(ix) Who is victim of any armed conflict, civil commotion or natural calamity;

The Indian position is obviously in consonance with the principle nullum crimen sine leg,
and recommendation of the UNO body on social defence.

3.3 Meaning of juvenile Delinquency

Juvenile Delinquency is legal term of behavior of children and adolescents that in adult
would be judge criminal under law. In the United States, definitions and age limits of
juvenile vary. The maximum age being set at 14 years in some and as high as 21 years in
others. The 16 to 20 years age group, considered adult in many places, has one of the
highest incidences of serious crime. A high proportion of adult criminal have a
background of early delinquency. Theft is the most common offence by children; more
serious property crimes and rapes are most frequently committed in later youth.

“Boys will be Boys,” was the old way of referring to youthfully breaking of rules. Now
days this propensity has an official name, it is Called juvenile delinquency13. Almost all
youths commit acts of which they could be arrested and taken to court. But it is a much
smaller group that ends up being officially define as delinquent. Official delinquents are
predominantly male. In 1965 boys under 18 years were arrested five times as often as
girls were referred to juvenile courts.14 the second UN Congress on Prevention of crime
had without attempting to formulate a standard definition indicated that the meaning of
the term juvenile delinquency should be restricted as for as possible to violation of
Criminal Law and that even for protection specific offences which would penalize small
irregularities or maladjusted behavior of the minors, bur for which adult will not be
prosecuted should not be created15 . The offences committed comprise, for the most part
such breaches of law as would be punishable in an adult by penal servitude or
imprisonment – stealing, burglary, damage, common assault and soliciting; in this list
also be added certain other misdeeds which none but a child can commit, as truancy and

13 A.E. Jones, Juvenile Delinquency and The Law, Penguin, Middlesex, 1945, p. 7.
14 Robert W. Wins Low, Juvenile Delinquency in Free Society, p.4
15. Seminar on Juvenile Delinquency, Role of Police, C.B.I. Report (1965) p.13

(68)
beyond parental control. And one or two which while offending against no explicit
enactment, may become a ground of official intervention.16

There is, however, no sharp line cleavage by which the delinquent may be marked off
from the non – delinquent. Between them no deep gulf exists to separate the sinner from
saint, the white Sheep from the black. It is all the problem of degree. It is the sand with
the moral fault of the children the run in and uninterrupted series for the most heart – less
and persistent crime that could possibly be picture up to the more occasional naughtiness.
The line of demarcation is thus an arbitrary line, and delinquency is, at a bottom a social
rather than a psychological and legal problem.17

A child is to be regarded as technically a delinquent when his anti – social tendencies

appear so grave that he become or ought to become, the subject of official action.18

In England, according to sec. 131 of the Children Act, 1908, a child is a person under 14
years age and a young person’ is one between 14-16 years age. On the establishment of
Bostal School by the Prevention of Crime Act, 1908, it was said that a ‘juvenile adult’, is
a person between 16 to 21 years age. Previously in the Juvenile Offenders Act of 1847
(the first legislative recognition of the needs for dealing differently with adult and with
inmates offenders) a child was defined one under 12 years age. The principle of this
definition still largely governing the trial of child and young persons.19
Etiologically, the term ‘delinquency’ has been derived from the Latin word delinquer
which means ‘to omit’. The Romans used the term to refer to the failure of a person to
perform the assigned task or duty. It was William Caxton who in 1484, used the term
‘delinquent’ to describe a person found guilty of customary offence. The word also found
place in Shakespeare famous play ‘Macbeth’ in 1605. In simple word it may be said that
delinquency is a form of behavior or rather misbehavior or deviation from the generally
accepted norms of conduct in the society.

However, the penologist has interpreted the word “juvenile delinquency” differently.
Generally speaking, the term refers to a large variety of disapproved behaviors of

16. Cyril Butt, The Young Delinquent, University of London Press, London, 1945, p. 14.
17. Cyril Burt, The Young Delinquent, University of London Press, London, 1945, p. 15.
18. Cyril Burt, The Young Delinquent, University of London Press, London, 1945, p. 15
19. Cyril Burt, The Young Delinquent, University of London Press, London, 1945, p. 15

(69)
children and adolescents. Which the society does not approve of, and for which some
kind of admonishment, punishment or corrective measure is justified in the public
interest, thus the term has a very extensive meaning and includes rebellious and hostile
behavior of children and their attitude of indifference toward society. Certain other acts
such as begging truancy, vagrancy, obscenity loitering, pilfering, drinking, gambling etc,
which various persons very often commit are also included within the meaning of the
term juvenile delinquency. 20 It may, therefore, be inferred that a juvenile is an adolescent
person between childhood and manhood or womanhood, as the case may be who indulges
in some kind of anti- social behavior, which if not checked, may turn him into a political
offender. It is suggested that this definition of juvenile delinquency is generic rather than
specific and, therefore, it might be regarded as incompatible with the fundamental
principle of criminal law which requires a distinct breach of law.

Expressing his view on juvenile delinquency, Albert Cohen observed that the only
possible definition of delinquency is one that relates to the behavior in question to some
set of rules. The rules themselves are a heterogeneous collection of regulations
Some common to all communities and others only to be found in one or two.21 Caldwell
.

prefers to leave the terms vague and includes within it all acts of children which tend
them to be pooled indiscriminately as wards of the State.22

Ruth Cavan (USA) observed that “ irrespective of legal definition, a child might be
regarded as delinquent when his antisocial conduct inflict suffering upon others and when
his family find him difficult to control. So that he becomes a serious concern of the
community”

Some critics argue that the statutes defining the various delinquent acts are vague in
terms of their contents because they are contrary to the fundamental principle of criminal
law as expressed through the Latin maxim nullum crimen sine lege, which means an act
cannot be a crime unless it is so defined under the existing law. The idea is that there
should be certainty about acts that are prescribed as crimes. Thus, a child or an adolescent
who is growing up in idleness wanders about the street in late night without any purpose

20. J. M. Sethna, Society and Criminal, 4th edition, Bombay, 1980, P.329
21. Albert K. Kohen, Delinquent Boys, The Culture of Gangs, The Free Press, 1955, p.3
22. Robert G. Caldwell, Criminology, Ronald Press Company, 1956, p.375

(70)
or is habitually disobedient or uncontrolled is deemed to be a delinquent under certain
statutes. This is obviously not in strict accordance with the definition of crime but such
conduct are still treated as delinquent acts under the statutes relating to juveniles because
they are created not to punish them but to keep them away from such indecent and
lascivious conducts which are detrimental to the development of their personality.

In a broad generic sense juvenile delinquency refers to “a variety of anti social behavior
of a child and is define somewhat differently by different societies though a common
converging tendency may be noted in those form, namely, socially, unacceptable
tendency of the child at any given time”.

It may be noted that a great variety of acts included within the term ‘juvenile
delinquency’ are otherwise non criminal in nature and are freely tolerated it done by
adults. For example, smoking, drinking or absenting oneself from home may be a
permissible conduct for adult but the same is treated as a delinquent as if committed by
children or adolescents.

It is sometimes argued that delinquency is not a criminal status. But this view has been
repelled by Paul W. Tappan who asserts the euphemistic terminology such as “hearing
‘instead of “trial” or “disposition” instead of “sentence” should not conceal from us the
fact that nature of entire even worse, for it may abandon the fundamental of justice in the
guise of promoting superior justice.23

The question of exact definition of juvenile delinquency has always remained a debatable
issue among criminologist. It has been engaging the attention to United Nations for quite
some time, the second United Nationals Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the
Treatment of offenders held in August, 1960 in London, took up the problem of juvenile
delinquency, and the consensus was that the issue of definition need not be stretched too
far and the meaning of the term ‘juvenile delinquency’ be restricted to all violations of
criminal law and maladjusted behaviors of minors which are disapproved by society.

The General Assembly of United Nations adopted the convention on Rights of the Child
on 20th November , 1989 which prescribed as set of standard to be adhered to by all the

23. Paul W. Tappan, Juvenile Delinquency, McGraw Hill, Book Company, New York, 1960, p.170

(71)
State parties in securing the best interest of the child, the convention also emphasized on
social reintegration of child victims, to the extent possible, without resetting to judicial
proceeding .The Government of India ratified the convention on 11th December , 1992
and therefore, it became expedient to re-enact the existing Juvenile Justice Act. 1986 to
meet the requirements of the standard prescribed by the Convention on Right of the child
and all other International instruments, it is in this backdrop that the Juvenile Justice
(Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 was enacted repealing the Juvenile Justice
Act, 1986.

In the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children)Act, 2000 the term ‘delinquent
juvenile’ used in the earlier Juvenile Justice Act 1986 has been substituted by the words
‘juvenile in conflict with law.’ 24 It is, therefore obvious that every conduct prohibited by
statue is not to be taken as an act of delinquency. Instead the conduct which tends to
constitute an offence, not only from the legal standpoint but also from the angle of
prevalent social norms and values shall be included within the meaning of the terms
‘delinquency’. For example, smoking, begging, vagrancy, etc. being harmful for the
growing children are intended to be controlled be the enforcement of the Act.

Similarly, the children who are incorrigible, uncontrollable, destitute or orphans etc who
need active support and care of the community and who need active support and care of
the community and who were termed as ‘neglected children’ under the repealed Juvenile
Justice Act of 1986 have been called as ‘children is need of care and protection.25 Under
the Juvenile Justice (care and protection of Children) Act, 2000 which came into force on
December 30, 2000. ‘Juvenile’ or ‘child’ means a person who has not completed
eighteenth years of age, be he a boy or a girl.

3.4 Delinquency in Girls

Sexuality Theme was reiterated by a group of British Researchers like John Cohie,
Valerie Cowie and Eliot Slater. Who argued that dysfunctional families are the source of
female Delinquency.26 There is universal agreement among Criminologist that the girl

24. Section 2(1) of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000
25. Section 2(d) of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000
26. Sandra Jean Beal, Young Offenders and Youth Justice, Fourth Edition, 2011, p. 172

(72)
and women fall foul of the law much less frequently, than men and boys and that when
they do so, by and large the delinquencies’ do not take on the aggressive and socially
destructive qualities of much of the criminal behavior of the males, and can in fact be
regarded in a less serious light.27

He further says that the sex difference must lies close to the etiological factors that go to
the causation of delinquency and an effort must be made to understand it.28 The evidence
of those who have made comparative studies runs consistently in one direction (By
Fernald Bingham, Healey and Bronner, Sheldon and Seleanor Glucek, Bagot, Otterstrom,
Atcheson and Williams, Wattenbeg and Saunders, Monahan, Morris, Schofied, Walker).
Comparing delinquent girls poor homes, with more mental abnormality in the family,
with poorer moral standards, worse discipline, more often a broken home, more frequent
change of home meter conflict at home and more distributed more marked in girls than in
boys, the girls have worse school record, and more often have developed a hostile
reaction towards schooling they show a larger degree of rejection of family influence,
their working careers are worse.

Delinquent girls more often than boys have other forms of impaired physical health; they
are noticed to be oversized, lumpish uncouth and graceless with a raised incidence of
minor physical defects. Yet with all this greater amount of abnormality, the peak age of
delinquency comes about one year later in adolescent girls than in boys and the ultimate
outlook for social adjustment is better for girls than boys.

Thereof the authors have attempted to interpret the differences, Otterstrom suggests that
(1) girls are less hereditarily prone to delinquency than boys and so (2) require greater
influence form their environment to fall into bad ways. Differences between the sexes in
hereditary pre- disposition could be explained by sex-linked gene. Furthermore, the
female mode of personality, more prudent more timid, more lacking in enterprise, may
guard her against delinquency, the behavior of boys may be more sensitive to
environmental influences, and may need relatively small stress to become delinquent
compared with large stresses needed in the case of the girl. the greater immunity enjoyed
by the female can be impaired by physical and psychological disadvantage of many

27. John Cowie, Valerie Cowie and Eliot Slater, Delinquency in Girls, Humanities Press, 1968, p. 166
28. John Cowie, Valerie Cowie and Eliot Slater, Delinquency in Girls, Humanities Press, 1968, p.168

(73)
unusual strength.

Watterberg and Sauders probably find the above statement acceptable. The emphasis that
delinquency in the two sex is most alike in form and frequency in prepubertal age, before
the rapid sexual differentiation of adolescence of adolescence has begun. Defect of
interpersonal relations especially conflicts within the family play a large role in causing
delinquency in girls than boys: and much male delinquency results from the kind of
social life (e.g. gang life) which the adolescent enters. 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 hitherto29. 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 jail30. The police

29. Daly, Kathleen, Feminism, Criminology and Criminal Justice: An Information Packet, 1991, p.58
30. Raffel, Sokoloff, Natalie J. McGraw-Hill, The Criminal Justice System and Women: Offenders,
Victims, and Workers. (2nd edition) Barbara 1995.

(74)
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.

The problem of child (juvenile) delinquency, like many other social evils, is linked up
with the imperfections and maladjustment of society and is also connected with the
present day system of education to some extent. This system aims more at the training of
the intellect than the education of the emotions which play such a vital part in the
formation of the pattern of the child’s behavior and personality. But the idea is gradually
graining wider acceptance that the juvenile delinquent needs the sympathy and
understanding of the society and social agencies and not the heavy hand of the law. It has
taken an unimaginative and insensitive society many dark centuries to achieve this degree
to understanding.

Earlier in day of your anti-social children were put to gruesome death in a vain attempt to
eliminate such undesirable elements form society and to deter the respective ones in
Britain. In the closing years of the 18th century, a 12 years old child, who was accused of
stealing a spoon was beheaded, but such steps did not lead to a decrease of stealing a
spoon was but such steps did not lead to a decrease in the incidence of Juvenile
delinquency. Right thinking people all over the world, therefore began to think of other
means to deal with this critical problem. A good many years of legal and humanitarian
concern for the welfare of children climaxed on the establishment of the first Juvenile
Court in 1899 in Chicago. Our country followed suit and soon children courts,
correctional institutions, special schools, probation services, etc became special features
of juvenile system.

3.5 Nature and Extent of Juvenile Delinquency in India

To point out the juvenile delinquency is on the increase is not correct statement keeping
in view the recent statistics available to us. But it may be interesting and useful to find
out the rate at which it is manifested in a higher degree than in others. It will be also
interesting to note the pattern of juvenile delinquency items of differentials based on age,

(75)
sex and religion. Crimes committed by the juvenile may range from petty offences to
heinous offences. It has been found the offences committed by juveniles to the total IPC
crimes report in the country has shown a declining trend since 1989. From 1.2% during
1989, the share of juvenile crimes has steadily gone down. Though it showed some
marginal increase between 1995-1996, but again went down to 0.5% during 1997-99.
Under the IPC a total of 16509 IPC cases were registered against juvenile during the
years 2001 showing an increase of 78.1% against such cases in 2000.Similarily a total of
8332 cases of juveniles were reported under SLL during 2001 as against 5141casses in
2000. A good thing is that the recidivism shown by juveniles in conflict with law
indicated a decrease of 2.0 % over 1999.

The National Crime Records Bureau's data shows that in the past decade, the rate of
juvenile offences has steadily increased. In 2004, the rate for juvenile crime was 1.77
incidents per lakh of population. It had risen to 2.58 by 2013. However, juvenile incidents
as a percentage of total cognizable offences cognizable offences have not increased by
much because the overall rate of increase in crime too is much faster than population
growth.31 Under the Juvenile Justice (case an protection of children) Act 2000 separate
provisions have been laid down for children in need for care and protection. They are
dealt with, by the child welfare committee.32 A “child in need of care and protection”
means a child who is homeless, who lives with a person who had committed juvenile
injustice; who is mentally, physically or terminally ill. Who has an unfit parent, who is
likely to be abused, tortured or exploited, who is likely to be inducted into drug abuse,
who is a victim of armed conflict, civil commotion or natural calamity.33

The juvenile who were arrested during the year 2001 showed low education, poor
economic set- up as the main causes of juvenile delinquency.

1. Family background – 92.5% juvenile who were arrested resides with parent and
guardians and those who were homeless or living without parents their percentage

31. Times of India, April 8, 2015, New Delhi

32. Section 29, Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000
33. Section 2(d) Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000

(76)
 was just 7.5% 34

2. Economic set-up – As per the information a large numbers of juveniles belonged to

the income group whose annual income was Rs. 25,000 per annum. 69.6% Juvenile
belonged to this group and the share of juveniles form upper middle – class and
upper income group was 13.8% and 0.4% respectively. These figures clearly
indicate that crime and poverty and inter sometime cases against the children of
higher – class families are either not reported to law or enforcement agencies do not
show it in their own records.

3. Religion – Figure over the years indicate that Muslims, Christians and other slightly
over – represented compared to Hindus having regard to compared to Hindu are
located in urban areas and are bound to have a higher share in the overall
criminality. Criminality and juvenile delinquency is essentially urban phenomenon.

4. Education is an essential reason for increase of juvenile delinquency apprehended

70.9% where illiterate of had education up to only primary level.

5. Sex – as one could expect the number of girls apprehended is lower than the boys,
in the year 1998 the total number arrested was 4949, but during the year 1999 it has
shown a steady increase and during this year 5372 girls were arrested, and it has
shown – increase from 26.6% during 1998 to 29.1% during the year 1999. The
number of girls who were apprehended in the year 2000 declined by 23.2% when
compared to the figure of 1999. But the year 2001 showed an increase. The ratio of
girls to the boys arrested for committing offices under IPC was 1:12 this may
because of inclusion of boys form 16-18 years.

6. Regional Distribution – as for as the regional distribution of juvenile crimes and

juveniles apprehended is concerned, Madhya Pradesh (2380) and Maharashtra
(1848) reported high incidence of juvenile crime under IPC. The above two State
registered 47.6% of total incidence recorded in the country, Manipur and
Meghalaya’s had not reported even a single case during 1999. The same was the
position as regarded the year 2000. During the year 2001, highest numbers of 3147

34. Crimes in India, 2001, National Crime Record Bureau, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of
India, New Delhi, P.281.

(77)
 juveniles were arrested under IPC in Madhya Pradesh. Followed by Maharashtra
were 2810 juvenile were apprehended, while in Manipur no juvenile was arrested
under IPC.

While there has been a marginal increase in the number of juveniles in conflict with the
law, the number of repeat offenders has declined. According to data from the National
Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), the number of juveniles in conflict with the law
increased from 31,725 in 2013 to 33,526 in 2014. However, the number of juveniles
apprehended for recidivism (repeat offence) came down from 9.5% in 2013 to 5.4% in
2014.

The percentage of juvenile crimes to total cognizable crimes also came down a shade
from 1.2% in 2013 to 1.18% in 2014. Incidence of total crime increased from 26.47 lakh
in 2013 to 28.51 lakh in 2014.35

This comes at a time when amendments to the Juvenile Justice (JJ) Act are under
consideration at Rajya Sabha. The bill, among other things, allows for juveniles between
16-18 years of age in conflict with the law to be treated as adults on the discretion of the
Juvenile Justice Board.

“Even the data on recidivism does not warrant any regressive change in the JJ law as
proposed by the WCD ministry,“ Bharti Ali of Haq: Centre for Child Rights said.36

The number of juvenile delinquents from economically weak backgrounds also saw an
increase as did the number of illiterate or poorly educated delinquents. According to
NCRB data, while 52.9% of juveniles apprehended in 2012 belonged to families with
annual income of less than Rs 25,000, the percentage went up to 55.6% in 2014. About
52% of juveniles apprehended in 2012 were either illiterate or educated only up to
primary level. This figure went up to 53% in 2014.Ali also pointed out that more IPC
crimes were committed by juveniles in 20122013 (13.56%) as compared to 2013-2014
(5.65%).

35. National Crime Record Bureau, 2014, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi
36. Times of India, New Delhi, August 22, 2015.

(78)
Rape by Juveniles

Government data shows crimes by juveniles — specially rape and abduction of women
— has seen an exponential rise in the past decade. While rape by juveniles has recorded a
143% spurt, abduction of women has jumped by 380% even though overall rise in
juvenile crimes recorded under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) has been
only 50% against figures for 2002. Even theft (64.5%) and murder (86.4%) have recorded
smaller jumps compared to rape and abduction by juveniles.

It has also been observed that the share of teens — aged between 16 and 18 — in juvenile
crimes has steadily increased. From 48.7% in 2002, it has gone up to 66.5% in 2012. In
2011, it stood at 63.9%.

Maharashtra, in particular, has had a poor show as far as controlling juvenile crimes are
concerned. With 4,570 cases of juvenile crimes, Maharashtra was second only to Madhya
Pradesh (5,446) and together with states like Assam (2,345), Chhattisgarh (2,180),
Rajasthan (1,880) and Andhra Pradesh (1,593) accounted for 64.5% of all juvenile
crimes. It also ended up with maximum juvenile arrests — at 4,221 — in the 16-18 age
groups.

In cases of rape by juveniles too, Maharashtra was among top five states in 2012 with 89
cases, next only to Madhya Pradesh (249), UP (110) and Rajasthan (102). Delhi —
notorious for its attitude towards women and infamous for the December 16, 2012 gang
rape involving a minor accused — recorded 57 rapes by juveniles last year.

Given that the alleged accused in the Mumbai gang rape have turned out to be petty
thieves, Maharashtra has more reasons to worry as it accounts for maximum thefts by
juveniles accounting for 19.8% of all juvenile thefts in the country.

A Mumbai Police officer explained, "Controlling juvenile crimes is a challenge as it is

not merely linked to law and order but also the socio-economic dynamics of the society.
Most juvenile criminals come from extremely poor backgrounds, start with stealing and
then slowly start indulging in bigger crimes, including robbery, murder and rape. So
many of them go back to their old ways even after getting caught and spending time in

(79)
juvenile homes. It's not just the fear of the law that will stop this."37

Data from National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) backs the analysis. More than 78%
of juvenile criminals came from families earning less than Rs 50,000 a year.

According to the data from National Crime Record Bureau, percentage of juvenile crime
to the total cognizable crime increased from year 2010 to 2014.In 2010, percentage of
juvenile Crime was 1.02.In 2011, it was 1.08, in 2012, it was 1.17, in 2013, it was 1.20,
and in 2014, juvenile crime was 1.18% of the total cognizable crime. Number of poorly
educated juvenile crime increases from 52% to 53%.

Juvenile crime has increased by over 47% in the last 5 years. Under IPC total juvenile
crime in 2012 was 35465 which increased in 2014 to 4256.Year 2014 witnessed 33981
murder, of which 841 were committed by juveniles. Out of the 36735 Rape cases 1989
were committed by Juveniles. Total juvenile arrested in 2014 were 48236, and repeat
offender were 2609.38

Juvenile Crime in last three years- Following is the Table of juvenile crime in
India from year 2012 to 2014.39

Rape-
Year No. of Cases
2012 1175
2013 1884
2014 1989

Assault with intent to outrage modesty of Women-

Year No. of Cases

2012 613

37. The Times of India, New Delhi, August 24. 2013.

38. Crimes in India, National Crime Record Bureau, 2014, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of
India, New Delhi
39. Crimes in India, National Crime Record Bureau, 2014, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government Of
India, New Delhi

(80)
 2013 1422
2014 1591
Kidnapping and Abduction-
Year No. of Cases
2012 789
2013 1121
2014 1455
Murder-
Year No. of Cases
2012 990
2013 1007
2014 841
Attempt to Murder-
Year No. of Cases
2012 876
2013 825
2014 728

Above Data shows that there has been continuous increase in the juvenile Crime from
year 2012 to 2014. Assault on women by juveniles with the intent to outrage their
modesty rose by 132% in 2013 compared to the previous year, minister for women and
child development. Maneka Gandhi told the Rajya Sabha.Citing National Crime Records
Bureau (NCRB) data, the minister said the percentage of crimes committed by children in
the 16-18 years age group had also increased in relation to the total crimes committed by
children across all ages. This percentage rose from 48.7% in 2002 to 66.3% in 2013.In
response to another question, Maneka said her ministry had conceptualized a scheme to
establish a `One Stop Centre' to assist and support women affected by violence at 660
locations covering all districts in the country in a phased manner. The centres aim to
facilitate medical aid and police assistance, provide legal counselling management,

(81)
psycho-social counselling and temporary shelter, if required, she added.40

National Human Rights Commission and Measures for Juvenile Justice

System

The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) is an embodiment of India’s concern

for the promotion and protection of human rights. Ever since the NHRC came into
existence, it has been concerned about the plight of juveniles who come in conflict with
law and children who are in need of care and protection. While the Law Division of the
NHRC has been dealing with complaints; the Policy Research, Projects and Programmes
Division of the NHRC has been monitoring the implementation of the related Act at the
national level as well as studying and recommending effective application of those
international instruments that intend to improve the overall functioning of the juvenile
justice system in the country. Some instances of NHRC intervention in this regard are
given below.

Deaths and Rapes in Homes set up under Juvenile Justice Law

In September 1996, the NHRC called for information with regard to incidents of deaths
and rapes in Homes set-up under the JJA 1986 within 24 hours of its occurrence by
writing to the Chief Secretaries/Administrators of all the States/Union Territories. Later,
in February 2002, the NHRC modified its existing instructions on the subject directing
that an inquest by a Magistrate be conducted immediately in all cases of deaths in Homes
and the report – including comments on possible medical negligence – to be sent to the
NHRC. In case of any allegation of rape/unnatural offence on any inmate of the Home, a
criminal case should be registered immediately against the offending staff
member/officer and a copy of the FIR and the supervision note should invariably be sent
to the NHRC. If any foul play is suspected in the magisterial inquest, the post-mortem
examination should invariably be done and the post-mortem report sent to the NHRC. In
all cases of death of an inmate where the initial inquest by a Magistrate indicates some
foul-play, magisterial inquiry should be made mandatory.

40. Times News Network, New Delhi, November 28, 2014.

(82)
Escape of Inmates from Juvenile Homes

Under this broad head, the NHRC dealt with 87 cases, where its attention was drawn to
the escape of several inmates from the Beggars’ Homes/Juvenile Homes/Remand Homes
situated in different parts of Maharashtra. The Commission pointed out that it was the
state government’s duty to take appropriate measures for the safe custody of the inmates.
The escape of such a large number of inmates was indicative of the fact that there were
either serious infrastructural deficiencies or that security arrangements were faulty.

The Commission directed that the state chief secretary should review the functioning of
these homes with a view to ensuring better care and avoiding the recurrence of
circumstances leading to such incidents.41

Illegal Detention of a Three-year-old Child for Ten Years

A former Member of Parliament drew the attention of the NHRC to the plight of a young
girl who had witnessed a murder, and was thereafter, detained in police custody for about
ten years. The NHRC immediately took note of the letter and called for a report from the
Director General of Police, West Bengal. The report of the Director General of Police
stated that on 30 March 1990, the learned Magistrate, Nadia had ordered that one child,
who was an eyewitness in a case in which her father had allegedly murdered her mother,
should be lodged at Liluaha Home and produced in the court, as and when required. She
was last produced in the court on 20 September 1996, wherein she failed to identify the
accused. In 1992, she was shifted from Liluaha Home to a Child Care Home (run by an
NGO) on the orders of an IAS Officer who was also the ex-officio Director of Social
Welfare Department, West Bengal, for proper upkeep, schooling, protection, care and
further rehabilitation of the concerned child. However, when the said NGO approached
the learned court for approval of transfer, the learned Sessions Judge termed the act as
highly irregular and asked for an explanation from the Director of Social Welfare for
having transferred the child without prior approval and intimation to the court.
Subsequently, she was again sent back to Liluaha Home. Through its memo dated 1
September 1997, the Social Welfare Department once more directed transfer of the child
to a government approved/recognized NGO Child Care Home for her education, care and

41. National Human Right Commission, Annual Report, 1998-1999

(83)
rehabilitation. The report stated that the court had not passed any order so far.

The Commission expressed its shock at the inhuman and apathetic manner in which the
case was handled by the police and other authorities. It found the very idea of retaining a
girl child, who was only three years old at the time of the incident, and considering her
competent to be a witness in a court of law, and keeping her waiting for the
commencement of the trial for ten long years, as shocking. The appalling lack of interest
shown by the authorities in the welfare of the innocent child resulted in depriving her of
her normal childhood which could never be regained. No amount of compensation, the
Commission felt, would be adequate for the loss she had suffered. However, it
recommended to the Government of West Bengal to ensure that the child is suitably
rehabilitated and educated in an SOS Children’s Home or sent to a reputable institute run
by an NGO in or around the city of Calcutta, till she became a major. The Commission
also recommended that a sum of Rs.50,000/- be deposited in her name through a court
guardian, the interest of which would be paid to the institute looking after her, and the
principal amount to be released to her on her becoming a major to enable her to settle in
life. Thereafter, a compliance report from the Government of West Bengal was received
in the matter.42

In October 2005, when the Registrar General of the High Court of Patna informed the
NHRC that the implementation of the JJA 2000 was extremely poor in Bihar, the NHRC
once again directed that the matter of juvenile justice be reviewed expeditiously in each
state and union territory. Prior to this, the NHRC in collaboration with an NGO (Socio-
Legal Information Centre, New Delhi) had undertaken a study concerning the
implementation of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 in 16
states. Its findings revealed that the implementation of the JJA 2000 was poor in all its
aspects and needed to be strengthened.

The NHRC organized a two-day National Conference on Juvenile Justice System in India
on 3 and 4 February 2007 in New Delhi. The Conference made a number of
recommendations/suggestions to improve the functioning of the juvenile justice system in
the country. It laid stress on the implementation of the Juvenile Justice Act 2006 in both

42. National Human Right Commission, Annual Report, 1999- 2000

(84)
letter and spirit, urging the states/union territories to establish the required infrastructure
under the juvenile justice system to ensure that there is zero pendency and that the inquiry
is completed within the stipulated period. It also emphasized on providing requisite care
to ensure protection, growth and development of children, both in conflict with law and
in need of care and protection

3.6 Causes of Juvenile Delinquency

Juvenile delinquency has become a global phenomenon these days, despite intensive
rehabilitative measures and special procedure for tackling the problem of juvenile
delinquency, there is a growing tendency among youngsters to be arrogant, violent and
disobedient to law with the result there has been considerable rise in the incidence of
juvenile delinquency, the main causes for this unprecedented increases in juvenile
delinquency are as follows:

(1) The industrial development and economic growth in India has resulted into
urbanization which in turn has given rise to new problems such as housing, slum
dwelling, overcrowding, lack of cost of living in urban areas make it necessary even
for women to take up outdoor jobs for supporting their family financially. With the
result their children are left neglected at home without any parental control.
Moreover, temptation for modern luxuries of life lures young people of resort to
wrongful means to satisfy their wants. All these factors cumulatively lead an
enormous increase in juvenile delinquency in urban area. It has rightly been
commented that today “there is no crime but there are only criminals in the modern
senses of penology. It is therefore, desired that the society be protected from
offenders by eliminating situations which are conductive to delinquency.

Family Problem- Family is the basic socialization agency for the children. Children
learn basic concepts about good and bad from their family, they make their values and set
the norms of society. Family can make or break the personality of the children. In family
the most important role is played by the parents and siblings. Most of the adolescents
who show delinquent behavior in any form belong to families that could not give firm
foundation to the children. Broken families, single parent families, separated families,
frequent parents fight, lack of trust and confidence among the parents, criminal parents or

(85)
psychological problems in parents can be the viol important reason behind juvenile
delinquency. The other reason can be siblings rivalry or unequal treatment between
children. Parents and elder siblings have the responsibility to mold the personality of the
children. When parents or siblings do not show moral behavior or they commit crime
children or younger siblings also get motivation t o do something bad a delinquent
behavior.

• Economic problems in family

The choice of Delinquency may be shaped by economic needs. Often the cause of
juvenile delinquency is economic problems in family. Youth belonging from poor
economical status easily get involved in criminal activities.43 They want to improve their
status and for this purpose they use negative path, in this regard often people do not
support teenagers who belong from poor status and they go for criminal activities.

• Psychological problems in family

Psychological problems in parents or siblings can also be a risk factor of juvenile

delinquency. Mental illnesses or other psychological problems like depression,
frustration, aggression or hyper behavior showed by the parents can make the child feel
deprived and inferior among friends. Sometimes children adopt depression and anger
from parents or elder siblings.

• Social problems in family

In many families parents or elder siblings are involved in various social problems. There
can be various problems like gender discrimination, age discrimination, racial
discrimination, child labor or violent8686 of animal rights. Children and youth learn what
they see in their family, in many rich families parents do not feel shame in child labor and
children could not understand that child labor is against society and against morality.
Social problems cause stress and due to stress teens get involved in violent86.

• Moral problems in family

Morality is the most important concern among teens today. Teens should know how to

43. Larry J. Siegel, Brandon C. Welsh, Juvenile Delinquency, Theory Practice And Law, 10th edition
Wardsworth Cengage Learning publication, USA, p.72.

(86)
respect family and other people. They should give the due respect to everyone they know
and meet. Some parents do not take care of their elders, and it is a known fact that such
children who see their parents disrespecting their elders, their children never respect their
parents and elder siblings.

• Parenting style

Parenting style also matters and many researchers say that it is one of the biggest reason
why teens commit crime. Parents are some time very harsh and they punish their children
for small issues. Children start disrespecting their parents and they become violent.
Adolescents whose parents are poor Supervisors and allow them the freedom to socislize
with peers are more likely to engage in deviant behaviours.44

(2) Disintegration of family system and laxity in parental control over children is yet
other causes of increase in juvenile delinquency. The British Home Secretary Mr.
Butter once said that the natural consequences of broken home are lack of parental
control, absence of security and want of love and affection towards children which
are contributing factors for juvenile delinquency.
(3) Unprecedented increase in divorce cases and matrimonial disputes is yet another
cause for disrupting family solidarity. Today, man’s hold over his family is
declining fast. Undue discrimination among children or step-motherly treatment
also has in advice psychological effect on youngsters. Once a child feels neglected,
he is bound to go astray and this furnishes a soothing ground for juvenile
delinquency.45 The children, therefore, need affection, protection and guidance at
home and have to be handled very carefully. Greater emphasis should be on
preventing them from indulging into criminality rather than curing them after they
have committed the offence. The parents and other elderly members of the family
must provide adequate opportunities for their youngsters to develop their
personality, this is possible through proper education and training and childcare.
(4) The rapidly changing patterns in modern living also make it difficult for children
and adolescents to adjust themselves to new ways of life. They are confronted with

44. Larry J. Siegel, Brandon C. Welsh, Juvenile Delinquency Theory Practice And Law, 10th edition
Wardsworth Cengage Learning publication, p.72.
45. Cyril Burt, The Young Delinquents, University London Press, London, 1945, p.96.

(87)
 the problem of culture conflict and are unable to differentiate between right and
wrong. This may drive them to commit crime.
(5) Biological factors such as, early physiological maturity or low intelligence, also
account for delinquency behavior among juvenile. According to Lombroso,
criminals are born and they may be recognized by series of external features such as
receding forehead enormous development of their jaws, and large or handle shaped
ears. These external traits are thought to be related to personality types
characterized by laziness, moral insensitivity, and absence of guilt feelings.46 The
age of puberty among girls has gone down by three or four years on an average.
Today, Indian girls attain puberty at the age of twelve or thirteen while they still
remain mentally incapable of conceiving about the realities of life. In result they fall
an easy prey to sex involvements for momentary pleasure without, however
realizing the seriousness of the consequences of their act. It is therefore, desired that
the parents should Explain to their children, particularly the girls, the possible
consequences of prohibited sex- indulgences which might serve a timely waning to
them. Special care should be taken to ensure effective protection to girls against
prostitution and child pornography.
(6) Migration of deserted and destitute boys to slums brings them in contact with anti-
social elements carrying on prostitution smuggling of liquor or narcotic drugs and
bootleggers. Thus, they lend into the world of delinquency without knowing what
they are doing is prohibited by law.
(7) Poverty is yet another potential cause of juvenile delinquency. Failure of parents to
provide necessities of life such as food and clothing etc draws their children to
delinquency in a quest for earning by whatever means. At times even the parents
connive at this for the sake of petty monetary gains.
(8) Psychological Cause – The Human mind has long been considered a source of
abnormal behavior and therefore, crime is committed. Early varieties of
psychological theories of delinquency and crime focused on lack of intelligence and
personality disturbances as major causal factors. several of early pioneers of the

46. Steven M. Cox, Jennifer M. Allen, Robert D. Hanser and John J. Conrad, Juvenile justice A Guide to
Theory Policy and practice, eight edition, Sage Publication, Los Angles, 2014, p. 86.

(88)
 psychological school were convinced that biological factors played a major role in
determining intelligence , therefore they could be considered the proponent of both
schools of thought. Goddard said that eliminating a large proportion of mental
defectives would reduce the number of criminals and other deviant in society.
Similarly Goring focused on defective intelligence and psychological characteristics
as basic cause of crime in his attempt to refute Lombroso and other positivists. as
we indicated previously research concerning the relationship between defective
intelligence, IQ or learning disabilities and delinquency continues. Problem
concerning the reliability and reliability and validity of IQ tests and personality
inventories, as well as other methodological shortcomings continue to plague such
research.47

It must be stated that the nature of delinquency among male juveniles differs radically
from those of girls. Boys are more prone to offences such as, theft, pick- pocketing,
gambling, eye-teasing, obscenity, cruelty, mischief etc, while the offence commonly
committed by girls include sex- involvements, running away from home, truancy and
shop lifting. It is further noteworthy that delinquency rate among boys is much higher
than those of girls, the reason being that boys by nature are more adventurous and
enduring than those of girls.

****

47. Steven M. Cox, Jennifer M. Allen, Robert d Hanser, and John J. Conrad, Juvenile justice A Guide to
Theory Policy and practice, eight edition, Sage Publication, Los Angles, 2014, p. 91.

(89)