REHABILITATION MODEL: ADDRESSING RECIDIVISM AND

REINTEGRATION OF CHILDREN IN CONFLICT WITH LAW

MONIKA LOHAR

Abstract:
The children are considered as the assets of the society are imbibed with innocence and
innovation, are to be nurtured with unconditional love, care and concern, so it is our duty
that we must protect their rights and provide them an opportunity for their overall
development. But sometimes due to their immaturity, lack of awareness of the nature and
consequences, poverty, family, violence, psychological factors and various other societal
pressure and peer factors. In the present research paper will start with the child in conflict
with law, so as to get the fundamental idea behind the reasons, why there has been an
increasing trend of juvenile delinquency, further this research paper discussing in brief about
the Juvenile Justice System in India and about the relevant UN Conventions. After that this
research paper focuses on the best practices followed worldwide proposes a Rehabilitation
Model in addressing recidivism and promoting successful reintegration for children in
conflict with law in comparison to that of India. This paper aim of this research paper is to
identify the current scenario of Indian Juvenile Justice System in of Rehabilitation and
reduce reoffending rates and facilitating the smooth transition of juvenile offenders back into
society. Emphasizing rehabilitation and reintegration, the paper advocates for tailored
programs, including educational and vocational training. The incorporation of alternatives
to detention, such as diversion programs, and a steadfast commitment to the best interests of
the child are integral components of the proposed model law. This research aims to suggest
policymakers in adopting and implementing a effective juvenile justice approach that
prioritizes the well-being and future prospects of juvenile offenders. Additionally, restorative
justice principles are integrated to facilitate healing and reconciliation between the child
offender and the affected individuals or communities.
Keywords: Juvenile offenders, Rehabilitation Model, Reintegration, Recidivism
 1. INTRODUCTION
Children are the precious assets of the our country and it falls upon each of us to ensure that
they have a safe and secure environment to live in. Since a nation’s future depends upon the
young generation, the children deserve compassion and bestowal of the best care to protect
this burgeoning human resource. Noxious surroundings, neglect of basic needs, bad company
and other abuses and temptations would spoil the child and likely to turn him a delinquent.
Around two centuries ago, Adolphe Quetelet, a prominent Belgian social statistician, noted
that adolescents, especially young males, are more susceptible to engaging in criminal
behavior, disorderliness, and delinquency due to their impulsiveness and the conflicts typical
of adolescence1. Early penology failed to distinguish between adult and juvenile offenders
when it came to punishment. As, we already know that an individual convicted of a criminal
offence is sentence mainly driven by three key considerations they are: retribution, deterrence
and rehabilitation. In case of the juvenile offender, the rehabilitation principle is often
assigned more weight. If we look at the history, in ancient Roman law, children below a
certain age were considered ‘doli incapax’, meaning they lacked the capacity to form criminal
intent or mens rea. As a result, they were protected from being held fully responsible for their
actions. The issue of juvenile delinquency is therefore relatively new. Youngsters within a
certain age-group easily attracted to the temptations of life and lend into criminality. Given
the common belief that today's children are tomorrow's citizens, it's crucial to intervene early
to prevent young people from becoming habitual criminals later in life. To address this, many
countries are prioritizing the problem of juvenile delinquency. They have established separate
juvenile courts with procedures distinct from those of regular trial courts to handle young
offenders. The Model focuses on counselling, guidance, treatment of the juvenile offender
with the assumption that the intervention such as probation supervision, training cognitive
skills training and behavior therapy will change behavior and reduce juvenile offences.
Under the Indian legal scenario, specific laws are there in place to ensure the care, protection,
treatment, development, and rehabilitation of neglected or delinquent juveniles. The Juvenile
Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Amendment Act, 2021 was passed to amend
previous provisions of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015. Additionally, rules known as the
Juvenile Justice Rules have been enacted to support the implementation of these laws.

1.1. DEFINITION OF ‘CHILD’?

In simple terms, a juvenile is a child who has not reached the age of maturity where they can
comprehend the distinction between right and wrong. Legally, a juvenile is a minor who has
not yet reached a certain age at which they can be held liable for criminal acts, similar to an
adult under the country’s laws.
In India, there are various definitions for the age of a child, each corresponding to different
activities and legal regulations. These age limits govern a wide range of activities, including
school admission, marriage, voting eligibility, adulthood, employment, and joining services.
These age thresholds vary across activities and can differ between countries.

1
Prof. N. V. Paranjape, Criminology & Penology (including Victimology), Chapter XXIV Juvenile Delinquency
pg. 665 (18th ed. 2021)
According to the Indian Contract Act, 1870 sec 3 states that minor cannot enter into a
contract which means a person below the age of 18 years has no capacity to contract. It has to
be of the age of majority. According to Sec 3 of the Indian Majority Act, 1875 a person who
has not attained the age of 18 years is a minor. Further, the Factory Act, 1948 sec 2(c) lays
down that a child below the fourteen years age is not allowed the work in any factory.
The apprentices act, 1961 states that a person is qualified to be engaged as an apprentice only
if he is not less then fourteen years age and satisfies such standards of education and physical
fitness as may be prescribed. Under Immoral Trafficking (Prevention) Act, 1986, child has
been defined as a person who has not completed the age of eighteen years. Under the Child
Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986, a child means a person who has not
completed his fourteen years of age and is prohibited from working in hazardous processes.
The Indian Penal Code (IPC): In IPC, the term "child" might be used in various contexts. In
India, age limits vary depending on the specific legal context and purpose. For instance,
concerning criminal liability, the age limit is set at 7 years in general, but in certain cases, it's
raised to twelve years. To protect children from kidnapping, abduction, and related offenses,
the age threshold is 16 years for boys and 18 years for girls. Legally, a girl can marry at the
age of 18 years, but the age for sexual consent is set at 16 years. Conversely, the age of
marriage for boys is 21 years. However, IPC doesn't specifically define a child but refers to
individuals below the age of 18 in relevant sections. The Juvenile Justice (Care and
Protection of Children) Act, 2015: According to this act, a "child" refers to any person who
has not completed eighteen years of age.
The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education (RTE) Act, 2009: Under this act, a
"child" generally refers to any person who has not completed fourteen years of age.
The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012: In POCSO Act, a
"child" means any person below the age of eighteen years.
The Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006: This act defines a "child" as a male below the
age of twenty-one years and a female below the age of eighteen years.
As per the Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 1 defines a child as every human
being below the age of eighteen years unless the law applicable to the child, majority is
attained earlier. According to the UN Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their
Liberty, individuals below the age of 18 are considered juveniles. However, there has been
some debate in Indian jurisprudence regarding the determination of a juvenile's age in
criminal cases. In the case of Umesh Chandra v. State of Rajasthan2, the Supreme Court of
India stated that the relevant date for determining the age of an accused claiming to be a child
is the date of the offense, not the date of the trial. Contrary to this, in Arnit Das v. State of
Bihar3, a two-judge bench of the Supreme Court held that the relevant date should be the date
when the accused is produced before the court, not the date of the offense. Due to this
conflicting interpretation, the matter was referred to the Constitution Bench in Pratap Singh
v. State of Jharkhand4. The Constitution Bench resolved the issue by affirming that the

2
(1982) 2 S.C.C. 202: 1982 Cri. L.J. 994
3
AIR 2000 SC 2264
4
AIR 2005 SC 2731
reckoning date for determining the age of a juvenile is indeed the date of the offense, not the
date of production before the court or relevant authority.

1.2. WHO IS A “CHILD IN CONFLICT WITH LAW”?

The term 'Child in conflict with law' is defined under Sec 2 (13) of the Juvenile Justice (Care
and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 means a child who is alleged or found to have
committed an offence and who has not completed eighteen years of age on the date of
commission of an offence. Therefore, based on definition, it is evident that a below 18 years
old are regarded as minors. The Indian Constitution contains specific provisions within its
'Fundamental Rights' chapter to ensure the holistic development of children.
Article 15(3) permits the state to enact special measures for the welfare of women and
children. The Juvenile Justice Act is a legislative outcome of its constitutional provision.
Additionally, Sections 82 and 83 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) also safeguards
children from criminal responsibility due to infancy. While these laws aim to support
children's well-being and future prospects, there's a growing concern regarding minors
involved in serious crimes, sometimes even below 18 years of age. Despite being minors,
these juveniles engaging in heinous crimes are entirely exempt from criminal liability. This
exemption is granted regardless of the severity of the offense, the maturity level of the
juvenile, or their conduct. Consequently, there's an urgent need to re-evaluate the current
approach and consider the implication of this across-the-board exemption for juvenile
offenders.

1.3. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

The concept of rehabilitating children in conflict with the law emerged as a response to harsh
and punitive treatment of juvenile offenders in the past. In ancient societies, children were
often treated as miniature adults and were subject to the same punishments as adults for
criminal behavior. The concept of juvenile justice as a distinct system did not exist, and
children were often punished alongside adults. During the Enlightenment, there was a
growing recognition of the special status of children and the need for different treatment in
the justice system. Reformers like John Locke advocated for a more humane approach to
juvenile offenders, emphasizing the importance of rehabilitation and education rather than
punishment. The concept of the "parens patriae" emerged, giving the state the authority to
intervene on behalf of children who were deemed to be in need of care or guidance. Some
ancient societies did have informal systems for dealing with children who committed
offenses, such as apprenticeships or placement in the care of extended family members.
The Apprentices Act, 1850
The first legislation on Juvenile Justice of India came providing special treatment for children
is the Apprentice Act, 1850 which required that children between the ages of 10-18 convicted
in Courts to be provided vocational training to teach them trade, craft or employment for their
rehabilitation. In the 19th century, there was a realization that it wouldn't be conducive for the
growth and rehabilitation of convicted children to send them to regular prisons where they
might mix with hardened adult criminals, which could harm them further. The Indian Penal
code of 1860 and the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1861 recognised the special status of
children, setting age limits on criminal responsibility and allowing separate trials and
reformatory treatment.
Reformatory School Act, 1897
In 1898 saw enactment of Reformatory Schools Act, which provided sending children below
15 years of ages to Reformatory Schools instead of prison, if found suitable.
Pursuant to the recommendation of the All Indian Jail Committee 1919-1920, the era of
Children Acts began in 1920 which extended the segregation of Children accused of
committing offences at the adjudication stage by establishing separate children courts. All
these Children Acts provided for sending the children to remand homes but also permitted
sending children to jail in exceptional circumstances. The Report of the Indian Jails Reforms
Committee 1919-1920 recommended the enactment of special law for children. Immediately
following the recommendations of the Committee, the Madras, Bengal, and Bombay
provinces enacted local Children acts in 1920, 1922 and 1924 respectively.
The Children Act, 1960
The children act was passed to function as a model legislation and for use in union territories.
This Act established separate Child Welfare Boards to handle cases relating to neglected
children. It also created the position of a probation officer who could “advise and assist
neglected or delinquent children.” In addition, it established separate Children’s Courts for
cases related to delinquent juveniles, thereby separating the judicial process for delinquent
and neglected children.
The Juvenile Justice Act, 1986
In 1986, the Supreme Court, in Sheela Barse v. Union of India5 ordered that the delivery
system suitable for juvenile offenders should be enforced on all States and such enforcements
had to be reported back to the court.
Following this, in the same year the Juvenile Justice Act of 1986 was enacted to address the
care, protection, treatment, and rehabilitation of neglected and delinquent juveniles. It aimed
to provide a uniform legal framework for the juvenile justice system across the country,
repealing all previous Children Acts.
The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act, 2000
Later, in 2000, the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act was reintroduced with some
amendments and became effective in April 2001. This Act ensured that children in need of
care and protection, regardless of their religion, received the benefits of a separate judicial
process. However, alongside this Act, Hindu and Muslim personal laws also governed
children in India.
Unlike J.J.A.1986 moved away from sex-discriminatory definition of juvenile and defined a
child (whether a boy or girl) as a person who has not attained 18 years of age. This was done
keeping in mind the UNCRC (United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child) norms
as well as the global understanding of fixing 18 as the cut-off age for criminal culpability. As

5
AIR 1986 SC 1773
this Act keeps on changing due to shortcoming in it, we have now J.J.A, 2015 which was
enacted after public pressure following Nirbhaya’s brutal gang rape case.

Juvenile Justice (Care And Protection Of Children) Act, 2015

In 2015, the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act was passed by the Indian
Parliament amidst controversy and debate. It replaced the previous juvenile delinquency law
of 2000, allowing juveniles aged 16-18 involved in serious crimes to be tried as adults. The
Act came into force on January 15, 2016, marking a significant shift in the treatment of
juvenile offenders in India.
On the other hand standard prescribed in the UN Standard Minimum Rules for the
Administration of Juvenile Justice, 1985 (The Beijing Rules) 6, UN Convention on the Rights
of the Child, (1989)7, UN Guidelines for the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency: the ‘Riyadh
Guidelines’ (1990)8, The United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of
their Liberty (1990)9, and all other relevant international instruments are always taken into
consideration to deal with juveniles in the conflict with law.

2. WHAT IS REHABILITATION?
The word "rehabilitation" has been in use since the 16th century. The Oxford English
Dictionary suggests its earlier use in 1533 when it referred to re-establishing or restoring
someone's position, rights, and privileges.
Rehabilitation is a correctional approach that aims to reform and reintegrate offenders into
society by addressing the underlying causes of criminal behaviour and reducing the
likelihood of reoffending. The success of rehabilitation programs is measured by the
recidivism rate among participants, which indicates whether the programs are effective in
bringing about behavioural change and helping individuals develop the skills and attitudes
necessary to lead law-abiding lives. Successful rehabilitation is also evident when individuals
reintegrate into society, find employment, rebuild relationships, and become productive,
contributing members of their communities. Rehabilitation programs differ from traditional
prison sentences in that they prioritize reform and reintegration rather than punishment. Key
principles of successful rehabilitation programs include evidence-based practices, cost-
effectiveness, and targeting the highest-risk and highest-need inmates. Rehabilitation
programs that incorporate mental health care have been shown to reduce recidivism rates, but
they face challenges in providing services to participants with mental illness, such as lack of
insurance coverage, stigma, workforce shortages, geographical barriers, lack of awareness,
and financial barriers. Strategies to overcome these barriers include telepsychiatry, integrated
care, task-sharing approach, cultural competence, community-based interventions, and
6
United Nations General Assembly, United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of
Juvenile Justice (the Beijing Rules), adopted by the General Assembly on 29 November 1985 (A/RES/40/33).
7
United Nations General Assembly, United Nation Convention on The Rights of the Child, adopted by the
General Assembly on 20th November 1989 (A/RES/44/25)
8
United Nations General Assembly, United Nations Guidelines for the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency (the
Riyadh Guidelines), adopted by the General Assembly on 14 December 1990 (A/RES/45/112).
9
United Nations General Assembly, United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of Their
Liberty (the Havana Rules), adopted by the General Assembly on 14 December 1990 (A/RES/45/113).
training and education. Successful rehabilitation programs play a crucial role in reducing
recidivism rates and helping ex-offenders successfully reintegrate into society.

2.1. REHABILITATIVE THEORY

There are four theories of punishment; the rehabilitation theory is one of the theories which
has a humanistic approach. The concept lies on the theory that an individual’s criminal
behaviour is caused due to a concerning factor. The reformative theory, also known as the
rehabilitative theory, is a criminological perspective that emphasizes the potential for
rehabilitation and personal transformation in offenders, including children in conflict with the
law. This theory asserts that criminal behaviour is not solely a result of inherent traits or
characteristics of the individual but can be influenced by social, environmental, and
situational factors. Therefore, the focus should be on addressing these underlying factors and
providing offenders with opportunities for rehabilitation and positive change.
The rehabilitation model emerged in the early 20th century as a response to concerns about
the harsh treatment of juvenile offenders in the criminal justice system. Prior to this, juveniles
were often treated the same as adult criminals and subjected to harsh punishments without
regard for their age or circumstances. The idea of rehabilitating young offenders gained
momentum with the establishment of the first juvenile court in the United States in 1899 in
Cook County, Illinois. This court aimed to provide a separate and more lenient system of
justice for young offenders, focusing on their rehabilitation rather than punishment.
Modern penologists continue to have faith in reformative justice, albeit with a cautious
approach. While they acknowledge the effectiveness of reformative methods, they also
recognize the need for moderation. These methods have proven beneficial, particularly for
juvenile delinquents, women, and first-time offenders. Even sex psychopaths show positive
responses to individualized treatment approaches. However, recidivists and hardened
criminals often do not respond well to reformist ideologies. Consequently, Salmond suggests
that while replacing deterrence with reformation entirely could be problematic, it is necessary
in certain cases, especially for individuals with diminished responsibility such as abnormal
and degenerates10. Therefore, punishment should not be viewed as an end in itself, but rather
as a means to achieve social security and rehabilitation for the offender within society.
The rehabilitation model aligns with India's commitment to upholding the rights of children,
as enshrined in the Constitution of India and international conventions such as the United
Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC). The adoption of the United
Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) has further influenced the development
of laws and policies related to juvenile justice, leading to more child-friendly approaches in
many countries. By prioritizing rehabilitation over punishment, the juvenile justice system
ensures that the rights and best interests of children in conflict with the law are upheld.
Many juvenile offenders in India come from disadvantaged backgrounds and face multiple
challenges such as poverty, lack of education, family dysfunction, and exposure to violence.
The rehabilitation model recognizes the importance of addressing these underlying factors to
prevent recidivism and promote the long-term well-being of juvenile offenders.

10
Prof. N. V. Paranjape, Criminology & Penology (including Victimology), Chapter XIV Theories of Punishment
pg. 310-311 (18th ed. 2021)
The rehabilitation model aligns with principles of restorative justice, which emphasize
repairing harm, promoting accountability, and restoring relationships between offenders,
victims, and communities. In India, restorative justice approaches are increasingly being
integrated into the juvenile justice system to provide alternatives to punitive measures and
promote healing and reconciliation.

3. LEGAL FRAMEWORK
Around the world, each nation has its own set of laws aimed at reducing juvenile crimes and
safeguarding the rights of young offenders. The definition of a juvenile varies from country to
country, impacting how punishments and trials are conducted. For instance, in India,
individuals below 18 are considered juveniles, while in Japan and Taiwan, the age is below
20. As a result, the severity of the crime and the laws of each country determine the
punishments and trial procedures for juvenile offenders.

3.1. JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM IN INDIA

In the post-independence era, the Children Act, 1960 was enacted and got amended in 1978
and finally replaced by the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986. This act was based on the 3
fundamental assumptions, they are:
 Young offender should not be tried, but should rather be corrected;
 They should not be punished but reformed;
 Exclusion of delinquents i.e. children in conflict with law from the ambit of the court
and stress on their non-penal treatment through community based social control
agencies such a Juvenile Justice Board, Observation Homes, Special Homes, etc.
Further, the JJ Act, 1986 was also replaced by the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of
Children) Act, 2000 was passed taking into the consideration all the International Standards
and aimed to protect and rehabilitate juvenile offenders by establishing special courts,
juvenile homes, and rehabilitation centres. The Act defined a juvenile as someone younger
than 18 years old. However, in response to the Nirbhaya case, where a minor was accused of
rape and faced potential charges as an adult, the Act was replaced by the Juvenile Justice
(Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. This updated legislation raised the maximum
sentence for serious crimes to seven years and allowed minors between ages 16 and 18 to be
tried as adults if committing heinous crimes. The Act also focused on mental health care for
juvenile offenders and included measures to promote their reintegration into society.
According to Justice Bhagwati and Justice Pathak, “Juvenile Delinquency” is by and large, a
product of social & economic maladjustment. Even if it is found these delinquency have
committed offences, they cannot be allowed to be maltreated. They do not shed their
fundamental rights when they enter the jail. The law throws a cloak of protection around
juveniles and seeks to isolate them from criminal offenders because the emphasis placed by
law is not incarceration but on reformation11. In India, the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958
the offender is released on probation with or without conditions and is allowed to live in the

11
Sheela Barse v. Union of India AIR 1986 SC 1773
community for his self-rehabilitation. In case of Ramji Missar v. State of Bihar12, it was
observed that:
“The purpose of release of youthful offenders in probation is to stop their conversion into
stubborn criminal as a results of their association with hardened criminal of mature age.
Modern Criminal Jurisprudence recognizes that no one is born criminal and that a good
many crimes are the result of socio-economic milieu”
The most recent amendment to the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act,
2015, was made in 2021. The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Amendment
Act, 2021, introduced several important changes to strengthen the juvenile justice system in
India. Some of the key amendments related to the rehabilitation and reintegration of children
in conflict with the law include:
Juvenile Justice Boards (JJBs)13: JJBs are established in each district to handle cases
involving juvenile offenders. The boards are responsible for determining the best course of
action for the rehabilitation and reintegration of juvenile offenders.
Enhanced Role of District Child Protection Units (DCPUs): The amendment emphasizes the
role of DCPUs in providing support and assistance for the rehabilitation and reintegration of
children in conflict with the law.
Aftercare Services14: The amendment includes provisions for the establishment of aftercare
homes and the provision of aftercare services for children leaving institutional care. These
services aim to support the reintegration of children into society and prevent them from
reoffending.
Child Welfare Committees (CWCs)15: The amendment strengthens the functioning of CWCs
by providing them with additional powers and responsibilities related to the rehabilitation and
reintegration of children in need of care and protection.
Adoption and Foster Care16: The amendment introduces provisions related to adoption and
foster care for children in need of care and protection, including children in conflict with the
law. These provisions aim to provide stable and supportive family environments for children.
Rehabilitation and Social Reintegration17: The amendment emphasizes the importance of
rehabilitation and social reintegration for children in conflict with the law. It requires the
government to take measures to ensure the rehabilitation and reintegration of such children
into society.

12
1963 (2) Cri LJ 173
13
Section 4 of Chapter III, The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015
14
Section 46 of The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015
15
Section 27 of Chapter V, The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015
16
Section 44 and 56 of The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015
17
Section 39 of Chapter VII, The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015
 3.2. JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM IN U.S.A
The juvenile court system in the United States has its roots in Massachusetts, particularly in
Boston, where in 1869, state agents were appointed to provide protective care for juveniles in
need. These state agents were responsible for overseeing the well-being of juveniles and
ensuring they were not mistreated or neglected. In 1878, the responsibility for the care of
juvenile offenders was transferred to probation officers. These officers were tasked with
supervising and assisting juvenile offenders who had been placed under their care. This shift
marked a transition towards a more structured and specialized approach to juvenile justice,
laying the groundwork for the development of the juvenile court system as we know.
In the United States, the juvenile justice system is governed by a combination of federal and
state laws. The primary federal law regarding juvenile justice is the Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention Act (JJDPA) of 1974, which has been amended several times, most
recently in 2018. The JJDPA sets forth core protections for juvenile offenders, including the
deinstitutionalization of status offenders (those who commit offenses that are only illegal
because of their age, such as truancy) and the requirement to sight and sound separate
juveniles from adult inmates in detention facilities.
In the United States, the definition of a child can vary depending on the context and the
specific law being applied. However, in general, a child is defined as a person who is under
the age of 18. This definition is used in various legal contexts, including juvenile justice,
child welfare, and education laws.
According to Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act, 1974, a "juvenile" or "child"
is defined as a person who has not attained the age of 18 years. This definition is used to
determine the jurisdiction of the juvenile justice system and the application of juvenile justice
laws.
In the United States, a child in conflict with the law is typically referred to as a juvenile
delinquent. The definition of a juvenile delinquent can vary by state, but it generally refers to
a person who is under the age of 18 and who has committed an act that would be considered a
crime if committed by an adult.
Juvenile delinquency laws are based on the principle of ‘parens patriae’, which means
"parent of the country." This principle recognizes that the state has a duty to act in the best
interests of the child and to provide rehabilitation and support rather than punishment. In the
US, the age of criminal responsibility is typically set at 18, meaning that children under the
age of 18 are generally not held fully responsible for their actions in the same way as adults.
Instead, they are often referred to juvenile court, which focuses on rehabilitation rather than
punishment.
The JJDPA also provides funding for programs that aim to prevent juvenile delinquency and
improve the juvenile justice system's effectiveness. Additionally, it establishes the Office of
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) within the U.S. Department of Justice,
which is responsible for implementing the Act's provisions and supporting states in their
efforts to improve their juvenile justice systems. According to the Office of Juvenile Justice
and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP), recidivism rates for the juveniles range from 25 to
55% within one to two years of release from a juvenile facility.
Regarding rehabilitation and reintegration models, US has various reintegration programs for
juvenile offenders, including educational and vocational training, counselling. The JJDPA
also encourages the use of evidence-based practices to reduce recidivism among juvenile
offenders. Recent amendments to the JJDPA have focused on promoting alternatives to
incarceration for juvenile offenders, such as community-based programs and restorative
justice approaches. These amendments also emphasize the importance of addressing the
underlying causes of juvenile delinquency, such as poverty, trauma, and substance abuse,
through comprehensive and individualized treatment plans.

3.3. JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM IN U.K.

In the UK, authorities have chosen to address juvenile delinquency outside the traditional
criminal law system. This approach has gained significant attention nationwide because many
believe that adolescent delinquency is often a passing phase that will naturally diminish with
age. Consequently, reformists argue that young offenders require a distinct approach to
rehabilitation. In response, English penal reformists have implemented alternative methods
for handling juvenile offenders. In 1838, Parkhurst Prison was established specifically to
address the needs of juvenile offenders. Shortly afterward, the British Parliament passed the
Summary Jurisdiction Act in 1979, which stated that children under the age of seven were
deemed incapable of committing crimes and therefore could not be convicted. The act
introduced a simplified trial process for juvenile delinquents and emphasized that magistrates
should recommend personalized treatment aimed at reforming these offenders. During the
International Congress on Prevention of Crime and Treatment of Offenders in Paris in 1895,
delegates unanimously agreed on the need for special procedures and increased judicial
discretion when dealing with juvenile offenders. Consequently, England introduced the
Probation of Offenders Act in 1907. This law empowered courts to release juveniles as
deemed appropriate and appointed probation officers to oversee, assist, and provide reports
on young offenders, aiding them in resolving their challenges.
During the 19th century in the UK, the juvenile justice system was in its early stages of
development. The system was based on the idea of reforming and rehabilitating young
offenders rather than punishing them. The Children's Act of 1908 established juvenile courts,
which were designed to be less formal and more child-friendly than adult courts. The courts
were intended to provide individualized attention to each child and to address the underlying
causes of delinquency, such as poverty, neglect, and lack of education.
In the United Kingdom, the term "child in conflict with the law" is not commonly used.
Instead, the legal term used to describe children who commit offenses is "young offender." A
young offender in the UK is generally defined as a person who is between the ages of 10 and
17 (inclusive) and who has been convicted of a criminal offense. The Children and Young
Persons Act 1933 and the Children and Young Persons Act 1963 provide the legal framework
for dealing with children in conflict with the law in the UK. According to Section 16 of the
Children and Young Person Act, ‘A child under the age of 10 years should not be arrested’.
The Children and Young Persons Act 1969 established the principle of juvenile justice, which
emphasizes the welfare of the child and the need for rehabilitation rather than punishment.
The UK juvenile justice system has undergone several reforms to promote rehabilitation and
reintegration of young offenders. The Crime and Disorder Act of 1998 introduced the
philosophy of early intervention to change the behaviour of young people and prevent
problems such as family issues, school failures, drug and alcohol misuse, and gang
involvement. The act also emphasized restorative justice, which aims to in-still responsibility
in young people, restore the victim, and reintegrate the offender into the community. The
Youth Justice Board for England and Wales promotes effective practice and encourages the
development and use of evidence-based programs. In recent years, the UK has implemented
various measures to enhance the success rate of rehabilitation and reintegration programs,
such as Youth Offending Teams (YOTs) and secure schools, which offer tailored services
designed to support the rehabilitation of young offenders.
The UK has also established a number of landmark cases that emphasize the importance of
rehabilitation and reintegration, such as R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex
parte Venables and Thompson (1997)18, This case involved the murder of a two-year-old boy
by two ten-year-old boys. The case raised questions about the age of criminal responsibility
and the treatment of young offenders in the criminal justice system. The court ruled that the
boys' trial and conviction were lawful, but emphasized the importance of rehabilitation and
reintegration for young offenders. Recent reforms in the UK have focused on reducing the
number of children entering the criminal justice system, diverting them towards prevention
and intervention programs, and providing support for their educational, vocational, and
mental health needs. According to the Proven Reoffending Statistics Quarterly Bulletin from
July to September 2021, the reoffending rate for juvenile offenders in England and Wales was
30.3%. This represents a decrease of 2.1 percentage points from the same quarter in 2020 and
a decrease of 1.3 percentage points over the last quarter. The highest reoffending rate of
58.7% was for those with an index offence of criminal damage and arson. Offenders with 11
or more previous offences had the highest rate of reoffending, with 65.0% for juveniles. The
rate of proven reoffending increases with the number of previous offences committed.

3.4. JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM IN AUSTRALIA

The historical development of Australia's juvenile justice system reflects a transition towards
a more rehabilitative and reintegrative approach for young offenders. Before the 19th century,
juvenile offenders were often treated as adults and subjected to harsh punishments. However,
the Juvenile Offenders Act of 1842 in South Australia was one of the earliest signs of change,
recognizing the need for a separate justice system for juveniles and emphasizing
rehabilitation and reform. Throughout the 20th century, Australia implemented progressive
reforms, establishing juvenile courts, diversionary programs, and alternatives to
incarceration, reflecting a growing understanding of the unique needs of young offenders.
There are several federal and state laws in Australia that govern the treatment of young
offenders. The Commonwealth Crimes Act 1914 sets out general principles of criminal
responsibility and procedure that apply across Australia, including provisions for the
treatment of young offenders. The major reforms in Australia's juvenile justice system have
been influenced by various policy shifts and public concerns. In the late 1970s and 1980s,

18
R v. Secretary of State, 1997 3 ALL ER 97
there was a movement towards a "back-to-justice" approach, which called for a shift from an
emphasis on securing the welfare needs of young people to ensuring their access to formal
justice. This led to the provision of greater procedural protections for young accused persons
and a requirement for them to accept greater responsibility for their offending behaviour. The
Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 establishes the Australian Human Rights
Commission, which promotes and protects human rights in Australia, including the rights of
children in conflict with the law. The Family Law Act 1975 includes provisions related to the
welfare of children, which can be relevant in cases involving juvenile offenders. State and
territory laws include the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW), the Youth
Justice Act 1992 (QLD), the Youth Justice Act 1997 (VIC), the Youth Justice Act 1997 (TAS),
the Youth Justice Act 1992 (NT), the Youth Justice Act 2016 (WA), and the Youth Justice Act
2019 (ACT). These laws govern the procedures for dealing with young offenders in each state
and territory, emphasizing the importance of rehabilitation, reintegration, and the best
interests of the child.
In Australia, the term "child in conflict with the law" is not commonly used. Instead, the legal
terminology typically refers to "young offenders" or "juvenile offenders.". Under Australian
law, a young offender is generally defined as a person between the ages of 10 and 18 who has
committed an offense.
In Queensland, the Productivity Commission's report 19on Youth Justice Services found that
56.8% of juvenile offenders aged 10 to 16 returned to court within a year, marking the highest
youth recidivist rate of any state or territory jurisdiction. Additionally, an average of 1,347
young people per day were subject to supervision orders in 2021-22, with Queensland
recording the highest daily average of young people in youth detention. A study by the
Queensland police service found that the number of young offenders has declined steadily in
recent years; however, there has been a concurrent growth in the size of the chronic offending
population. The "what works" model of rehabilitation, which focuses on evidence-based
interventions, is being used in Australia to reduce recidivism rates among juvenile offenders.
This model emphasizes family functioning, behavioural treatment programs, interpersonal
skills, and community integration.

4. CAUSES OF JUVENILE OFFENDERS

Juvenile delinquency has become a widespread issue worldwide, despite efforts to implement
rehabilitative measures and specialized procedures to address it. In recent times, there has
been a troubling trend among young people to display arrogance, violence, and disobedience
to the law. This has led to a significant rise in juvenile delinquency cases.
i. Urbanization
The rapid industrial development and economic growth in India have led to significant
urbanization, giving rise to a new challenges. These include issues such as inadequate
housing, cramped living conditions, overcrowding, lack of parental supervision, and family
breakdown. In urban areas, the high cost of living often compels women to seek employment
outside the home to support their families financially, leaving their children unattended and
19
Matt Eaton and Alexandria Utting, “Queenland Tops Nation for Child Detention Youth Repeat Offenders,
Productivity Commission Data Reveals”, Dt: 24/01/2023
without proper guidance. Furthermore, the allure of modern luxuries and material possessions
tempts young people to turn to illicit means to fulfill their desires. These factors, when
combined, contribute to a sharp increase in juvenile delinquency in urban settings.

ii. Family
The family holds a significant influence on the behaviour of most individuals. Factors such as
family size, composition, a history of substance addiction, mental illness, a child's exposure
to domestic violence, parental neglect, and lack of parental involvement and monitoring have
all been recognized as elements within the family that can impact a child's likelihood of
getting involved in conflicts with the law. The nature of the relationship between the family
and the child, the quality of parenting, and the association with deviant peers all play roles in
creating situations and behaviours that increase the risk of a child coming into conflict with
the law.
iii. Substance Abuse
Teenagers using drugs is known to increase the chances of both mental health issues and
getting involved in illegal activities. This risk becomes even higher when combined with
other factors like being neglected by the family or having family members who use
substances, especially if a parent drinks a lot. Peer pressure to try drugs can also push
teenagers into breaking the law. Starting to use substances early is often linked with having
other problems like being overly active, not paying attention, or behaving badly, which makes
these teenagers more likely to do risky things. There's also a higher chance that they might
face health issues later on due to using substances at an early age.
iv. Violence
The exposure to violence during childhood can have long-lasting effects on an individual's
mental well-being and behaviour. In India, there is a cultural acceptance of using violence as
a form of discipline, which contributes to the prevalence of violence against children.
Children in conflict with the law in India often have experienced or witnessed violence at
home or school. Despite laws against using force on children, the apprehension of a child in
conflict with the law often involves some level of violence. However, gathering concrete
evidence on the extent of violence suffered by children in India is challenging due to cultural
norms and fear of reprisals. This silence surrounding violence against children hinders efforts
to address the issue effectively. Recognizing and addressing the issue of violence against
children in India is crucial to ensure the well-being and rights of all children are protected.
v. Poverty
Poverty is a key factor pushing vulnerable children into conflict with the law. Children who
are orphans, street dwellers, from broken families, migrants, or engaged in child labour are
more likely to be drawn into delinquent behaviour as they face challenges in meeting their
basic needs and struggle for survival. Research supports this link between poverty and
delinquency, indicating that children experiencing prolonged poverty are more prone to
engaging in both property and violent offenses. Growing up in persistently poor households
increases the likelihood of juvenile offending. Studies also show a correlation between
welfare rates and crime, further highlighting the impact of economic deprivation on
delinquent behaviour. Addressing juvenile delinquency in India requires not only
interventions within the juvenile justice system but also broader social and economic
initiatives aimed at reducing poverty, improving access to education and healthcare, and
providing support to marginalized communities. By addressing the root causes of
delinquency, such as poverty and inequality, it is possible to reduce the number of children in
conflict with the law and promote their overall well-being.
vi. Biological factor
Biological factors, such as early physical maturity or lower intelligence, are recognized as
potential influences on delinquent behaviour in young people. Research suggests that a
combination of biological and genetic factors, along with environmental influences, can
affect behaviour, including antisocial and delinquent conduct. Various individual-level risk
factors, such as age, gender, complications during pregnancy and birth, impulsivity,
aggression, and substance use, have been linked to the development of juvenile delinquency.
Additionally, certain mental health disorders in childhood can increase the likelihood of
delinquent behaviour. Studies indicate that the interaction between genetic and environmental
factors is key to understanding delinquent behaviour, with environmental risks potentially
affecting individuals' behaviour differently depending on their genetic predisposition.
Therefore, while biological factors may contribute to delinquency, it's essential to consider
the complex interplay between these factors and the environment when addressing juvenile
delinquency.
vii. Migration in slums
The migration of abandoned and destitute boys to slums exposes them to anti-social elements
engaged in prohibited activities such as prostitution, drug smuggling, and bootlegging. This
exposure leads the boys into a world of delinquency, where they engage in unlawful
behaviour without fully understanding that their actions are against the law.
viii. Social media
Social media can have negative effects on juvenile behaviour, particularly through peer
influences and exposure to harmful content. Negative peer influences can lead to delinquent
behaviours, as social media allows for easy communication and influence among peers.
Exposure to violent or criminal content on social media can desensitize users to antisocial
behaviour, potentially increasing the likelihood of engaging in such behaviour. Increased
social media use has also been linked to decreased prosocial behaviour and an increased
likelihood of engaging in delinquent acts. Additionally, social media can amplify feelings of
isolation and alienation, making vulnerable individuals more susceptible to delinquent
behaviours.
Some common types of juvenile delinquency associated with social media use include
cyberbullying, online fraud, sexting, cyberstalking, identity theft, cyber extortion, cyber
vandalism, cyber terrorism, virtual gang activity, and cyber predators targeting minors for
sexual purposes. These forms of delinquency often overlap with traditional forms of juvenile
delinquency but occur in a digital environment.
 5. INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS
The rehabilitation of offenders and their successful reintegration into the community are
among the basic objectives of criminal justice systems. This is clearly acknowledged in both
international human rights law as well as the United Nations standards and norms, many of
which are directly relevant to the rehabilitation and social reintegration of offenders.

5.1. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child

(UNCRC)20
The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) plays a significant role
in shaping and promoting the principles of rehabilitation within the juvenile justice system.
While the UNCRC does not explicitly mention a "rehabilitation model," its provisions
emphasize the importance of promoting the rehabilitation and reintegration of juvenile
offenders in a manner consistent with their rights and best interests.
Protection of Children's Rights: The UNCRC affirms the rights of children to be protected
from all forms of violence, abuse, neglect, and exploitation. This includes protection within
the juvenile justice system, where rehabilitation programs aim to address the underlying
factors contributing to juvenile delinquency while respecting the rights and dignity of the
child.
Best Interests of the Child: A fundamental principle of the UNCRC is that the best interests
of the child should be a primary consideration in all actions concerning children. This
principle underscores the importance of tailoring rehabilitation interventions to meet the
individual needs and circumstances of juvenile offenders, prioritizing their well-being and
development.
Non-Discrimination and Equal Treatment: The UNCRC prohibits discrimination against
children on any grounds and emphasizes the right of all children to receive equal treatment
and protection under the law. This principle guides efforts to ensure that rehabilitation
programs are accessible to all juvenile offenders, regardless of their background, identity, or
circumstances.
Right to Education and Development: The UNCRC recognizes children's rights to
education, health, and development, which are closely linked to successful rehabilitation
outcomes. Rehabilitation programs often include educational and vocational components
aimed at equipping juvenile offenders with the skills and opportunities they need to lead
fulfilling and productive lives.

20
United Nations General Assembly, United Nation Convention on The Rights of the Child, adopted by the
General Assembly on 20th November 1989 (A/RES/44/25)
Restorative Justice: While not explicitly mentioned in the UNCRC, the principles of
restorative justice align closely with its emphasis on rehabilitation and the best interests of the
child. Restorative justice approaches focus on repairing harm, promoting accountability, and
restoring relationships between offenders, victims, and communities, all of which are integral
to effective rehabilitation efforts.
International Standards and Guidelines: The UNCRC serves as a framework for
establishing international standards and guidelines for juvenile justice systems worldwide. It
provides guidance to governments, policymakers, and practitioners on developing laws,
policies, and programs that promote the rehabilitation and reintegration of juvenile offenders
in accordance with human rights principles.

5.2. THE UNITED NATIONS STANDARD MINIMUM RULES FOR

ADMINISTRATION OF JUVENILE JUSTICE, 1985 (THE BEIJING
RULES)21
The United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice, also
known as the Beijing Rules, contain several provisions related to rehabilitation and
reintegration of children in conflict with the law.
Individualized Treatment and Rehabilitation Plans: This rule emphasizes the importance
of individualized treatment and rehabilitation plans tailored to the needs of each juvenile
offender22. It highlights the need for comprehensive assessments to identify the specific
needs, strengths, and challenges of juvenile offenders, and for the development of
personalized intervention strategies to address these factors.
Educational and Vocational Training Programs: These underscores the importance of
providing educational and vocational training programs for juvenile offenders. It calls for the
provision of academic and vocational education opportunities aimed at equipping juvenile
offenders with the knowledge and skills needed to reintegrate into society and lead productive
lives.
Counselling and Psychological Support Services: This rule emphasizes the need for
counselling and psychological support services for juvenile offenders. It recognizes that many
juvenile offenders may have experienced trauma, abuse, or mental health issues, and calls for
the provision of counselling and therapeutic interventions to address these issues and promote
emotional well-being.
Aftercare and Reintegration Programs: Rule highlights the importance of aftercare and
reintegration programs for juvenile offenders upon their release from custody. It calls for the
provision of support services, including housing, employment assistance, and community-
based support networks, to facilitate the successful reintegration of juvenile offenders into
society and reduce the risk of recidivism.

21
United Nations General Assembly, United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of
Juvenile Justice (the Beijing Rules), adopted by the General Assembly on 29 November 1985 (A/RES/40/33).
22
Follow-Up and Monitoring: This rule emphasizes the need for follow-up and monitoring of
juvenile offenders after their release from custody. It calls for the establishment of
mechanisms to track the progress of juvenile offenders, assess their needs, and provide
ongoing support and supervision to ensure their successful reintegration into society.

5.3. UN GUIDELINES FOR THE PREVENTION OF JUVENILE

DELINQUENCY: ‘RIYADH GUIDELINES’ (1990)23
The "Riyadh Guidelines" (1990), officially known as the United Nations Guidelines for the
Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency (The Riyadh Guidelines), stress several principles
regarding the rehabilitation and reintegration of children in conflict with the law. While they
do not specify a particular rehabilitation and reintegration model, they offer a framework for
member states to develop such models. They highlight the need for community-based
services and programs, especially in areas where such services are lacking. The guidelines
also encourage the involvement of specialized personnel at all levels to address juvenile
delinquency, indicating a commitment to providing comprehensive support and rehabilitative
services for young offenders.
Juvenile delinquency, as defined by the Riyadh Guidelines, refers to behaviour that deviates
from overall social norms and values. It is often considered a part of the maturation and
growth process, typically diminishing as individuals transition to adulthood. The guidelines
recognize that the majority of young people engage in some form of minor misconduct during
adolescence, which does not typically lead to a long-term criminal career. This understanding
underscores that delinquency is a common aspect of the transition to adulthood and a part of
the growth process.
In terms of prevention, the guidelines suggest that comprehensive plans should include
thorough analyses of the problem, inventories of relevant programs, services, facilities, and
resources, as well as clear responsibilities for qualified agencies. They stress the importance
of effective interagency cooperation and the involvement of youth in developing and
implementing delinquency prevention policies and processes. The guidelines emphasize
preventive measures that support the successful socialization and integration of all children
and young persons, highlighting the roles of family, schools, community, and mass media in
these efforts.

5.4. THE UNITED NATIONS RULES FOR THE PROTECTION

OF JUVENILES DEPRIVED OF THEIR LIBERTY (1990)24

23
United Nations General Assembly, United Nations Guidelines for the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency (the
Riyadh Guidelines), adopted by the General Assembly on 14 December 1990 (A/RES/45/112).

24
United Nations General Assembly, United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of Their
Liberty (the Havana Rules), adopted by the General Assembly on 14 December 1990 (A/RES/45/113).
The United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty (1990)
aim to establish minimum standards for the protection of juveniles deprived of their liberty,
with a focus on preventing the detrimental effects of detention and promoting their
integration into society. While these rules do not provide a detailed rehabilitation and
reintegration model, they include key aspects related to rehabilitation and reintegration:
Last Resort Measure: Detention should be a measure of last resort and for the shortest
possible time.
Special Attention and Protection: Juveniles deprived of their liberty should receive special
attention and protection due to their high vulnerability.
Educational and Vocational Activities: Detention facilities should offer relevant
educational, vocational training, leisure, and social activities to juveniles.
- Every juvenile of compulsory school age has the right to education suited to their needs and
abilities.
- Juveniles above compulsory school age who wish to continue their education should be
permitted and encouraged to do so, with every effort made to provide them with access to
appropriate educational programs.
- Every juvenile has the right to receive vocational training in occupations likely to prepare
them for future employment.
- Juveniles should be able to choose the type of work they wish to perform, and all protective
national and international standards applicable to child labour and young workers should
apply to juveniles deprived of their liberty.
- The organization and methods of work offered in detention facilities should resemble those
of similar institutions outside the facilities, in order to prepare juveniles for the conditions of
normal occupational life.
- Every juvenile who performs work should have the right to equitable remuneration, and part
of their earnings should be set aside to constitute a savings fund to be handed over to them
upon release.
Civil Rights: Civil rights of juveniles should be respected while in detention, and they should
not be denied civil, economic, political, social, or cultural rights solely due to their
deprivation of liberty.
Regular Inspections and Control: Regular inspections and other measures of control should
be conducted to secure the rights, care, and protection of juveniles in detention facilities. The
specific measures and principles related to this aspect include:
-Regular inspections and other means of control should be carried out, according to
international standards, national laws, and regulations, by a duly constituted body authorized
to visit the juveniles and not belonging to the detention facility.
-The Rules apply to all types and forms of detention facilities in which juveniles are deprived
of their liberty.
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
To summarize my perspective based on the given information, I affirm that juvenile
delinquency does not arise out of inherently criminal nature; rather, it stems from underlying
reasons and contributing factors. Therefore, it becomes crucial to develop more effective
models that not only rehabilitate juveniles but also encompass proactive governmental
policies geared toward safeguarding and empowering children. The current societal paradigm
is shifting from a welfare model to a rights model, where emphasis lies on ensuring that
children grow up free from exploitation and discrimination. As part of this transition,
governments must consistently monitor, evaluate, and exercise caution when dealing with
juvenile justice matters.
‘Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only
love can do that.” - Martin Luther King, Jr.25
It is essential to remember that the ultimate goal of the juvenile justice system is not merely
to punish but to guide juveniles onto a path of redemption and self-improvement. Through
careful consideration of the reasons and factors driving juvenile delinquency, we can work
together to build a safer and more compassionate world for tomorrow's generations.
REFERNCES
1. Prof. N.V. Paranjape (ed.), Criminology & Penology (Including Victimology) 665-
729, 308-310 (Central Law Publication, 18th edn., 2021).
2. Malik's (ed.), Law of Juvenile Justice in India (Delhi Law House, 1st edn., 2019).
3. Mr Shubham Kumar Singh, “Critical Analysis of Juvenile Justice System in India
with Special Emphasis on Juvenile Delinquency and Rehabilitation Methodologies” 4
Law Audience Journal 13 (2022).
4. Prerna Deep, “Principles of Rehabilitation and Reformation Under the Juvenile
Justice System” The Corporate Law Journal (2022).
5. “India’s Juvenile Justice System: Rights and Rehabilitation”, Bare Law, Sept. 02,
2023, available at: https://www.barelaw.in/indias-juvenile-justice-system-rights/?
amp=1 (last visited on Feb. 22, 2024).
6. Aisvarya Chandran, “Rehabilitation in the Juvenile Justice System” Slsh (2022).
7. Hussain Tawkeer, “Role of NGO in Rehabilitation of Juveniles” Legal Service India
8. Maram Deepika, “Functioning of Juvenile Justice Systems in India, US and UK:
Explained” Lawctopus (2021).
9. Sri Vaishnavi M.N, “Rehabilitation of Juveniles” Ipleaders (2019).
10. Vis Legis Law Practice, Advocates, “The Juvenile Justice System: Balancing
Reformative Goals and Challenges” Law and Social Justice : Intersecting Paths to
Equality (2023)

25
Martin Luther King, Jr., “Darkness Cannot Drive Out Darkness; Only Light Can Do That. Hate Cannot Drive Out
Hate; Only Love Can Do That.”, Brainy Quote, available at:
https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/martin_luther_king_jr_101472 (last visited on Feb. 22, 2024).
11. Matt Eaton and Alexandria Utting, “Queenland Tops Nation for Child Detention
Youth Repeat Offenders, Productivity Commission Data Reveals”, Dt: 24/01/2023
12. United Nations General Assembly, United Nation Convention on The Rights of the
Child, adopted by the General Assembly on 20th November 1989 (A/RES/44/25)
13. United Nations General Assembly, United Nations Guidelines for the Prevention of
Juvenile Delinquency (the Riyadh Guidelines), adopted by the General Assembly on
14 December 1990 (A/RES/45/112).
14. United Nations General Assembly, United Nations Rules for the Protection of
Juveniles Deprived of Their Liberty (the Havana Rules), adopted by the General
Assembly on 14 December 1990 (A/RES/45/113).
15. United Nations General Assembly, United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the
Administration of Juvenile Justice (the Beijing Rules), adopted by the General
Assembly on 29 November 1985 (A/RES/40/33).
16. Saumya, “What are Different Countries in the World Doing in the Field of Juvenile
Justice System and Care?” Judicateme (2021).
17. “International Perspectives on Juvenile Justice”, Criminal Justice, available at:
https://criminal-justice.iresearchnet.com/criminal-justice-process/juvenile-justice-
process/international-perspectives-on-juvenile-justice/ (last visited on Feb. 22, 2024).
18.