The Juvenile Justice Law in India: Are you Old Enough to Commit a Crime? (original) (raw)
Related papers
Juvenile Maturity and Heinous Crimes: A Re-Look at Juvenile Justice Policy in India
2017
On December 22, 2015, the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 received parliamentary approval, bringing forth an entirely new regime with respect to juveniles above the age of sixteen, accused of committing heinous offences. The background for its introduction was set by the horrific rape of a young student in 2012. The government justified the law as a measure which would have a deterrent effect on potential juvenile offenders. However, the opponents argue that the law would defeat the objective of having a separate juvenile justice system, and would not serve the goal of deterrence. They instead suggest that efforts be expended in ensuring more effective implementation of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act, 2000. The paper analyses the viability of the mechanism proposed by the new measure. It also evaluates the potency of the counter claim which proposes that the existing law be better implemented, and thereby examines the necessity for the in...
The International Journal of Children’s Rights, 2019
This article examines whether international human rights law (ihrl) allows States to make exceptions based on the serious nature of the crime alleged and the age of a child accused of an offence. It specifically analyses the compatibility with ihrl of India’s Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, which allows children 16 or above and accused of heinous offences to be tried as adults. The central argument is that trial and punishment of children as adults, for any offence, violates the right to non-discrimination recognised under ihrl as well as the principle of best interest, reintegration objective of juvenile justice and rights of juveniles provided in the UN Convention on Rights of the Child, 1989 and other international instruments.
Children in Conflict with Law: Indian and International Perspective
This research paper deals with a host of issues concerning national and international aspects qua the children in conflict with law. Emphasising on the philosophical, legislative and realist aspects vis-à-vis juvenile justice (care and protection of children and minors), the author has adopted the following central line of argument, that is, the current scenario concerning juvenile delinquency cries for incorporation of deterrent aspects, fine tuned, into the rehabilitative and reformative theories of juvenile reprimanding. At the heart of the matter is the Nirbhaya Tragedy, which has forced the legislative canons of the Indian Sovereign State, to stop and think, as to in which direction the juvenile justice system of the country is heading towards, for the state of affairs and circumstances (the ‘sprint’ rise in juvenile crimes) seem bleak enough to capacitate the short-circuiting of the entire criminal justice system in India, thus holding it to ransom. Author’s Observation: The Juvenile Justice Bill, 2014, has taken an intriguing position; that is, juveniles in the age category of 16-18 years, committing serious or heinous offences are to be tried as adults with no death penalty or life imprisonment pitted against them. Under the 2000 Act, the position is different; a delinquent juvenile aged 16 years or above, accused of a heinous crime is to be placed by the Juvenile Justice Board in an institution called ‘place of safety’ for a period of 3 years. If we go by the logic of the present Act (the 2000 Act), the juvenile accused (aged 17 years) in the Nirbhaya case, although was most brutal, aggressive, animal-like and maniacal in the commission of rape and murder of the 23-years-old; he (the accused), as per the provisions of the 2000 Act, should be kept in the ‘place of safety’ for a period of 3 years and then should be released with a legal presumption that the accused has been reformed. If, however, the juvenile accused was of 18 years of age, then it was open for the State to have tried him as an adult, levying against him the death penalty. This, with greatest respect is illogical and more-so in the nature of a legal absurdity. The approach of the Proposed Bill (the 2014 Bill) is sound, for it states that the Juvenile Justice Board, for an accused in the age category of 16-18 years, will decide on a case-by-case basis, whether the accused should be treated as a child or as an adult. The Board, aided by a team of experts will decide this based on the assessment of mental state of the accused.
Indian Juvenile Justice System: Child Conflict with the Law
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LAW MANAGEMENT & HUMANITIES, 2021
The unfortunate Nirbhaya incident occurred in 2012, which shocked the entire nation and called urgent need to amend the present law, where juveniles 16-18 years of age may be tried as an adult if they are charged with a heinous crime. This article starts with the evolution of norms and procedure as regards with juvenile justice. It further delves into the historical background starting from pre-independence era to post-independence era and to the current scenario. Further, it also shows that the increasing trend in the incidence of juvenile crime is a matter of concern. Then, it covers 3 models of juvenile justice system which are used across the world to deal with juveniles in conflict with law. Lastly, the article discusses about the adolescent brain development and further analyses the level of maturity, decision making and self control of juvenile. In the end, the article raises few important questions which the current laws need to address
Childhood and the Juvenile Justice System in India: A critical enquiry
Jadavpur University Journal of Sociology, 2012
In contemporary times, growing visibility of children has gained centre stage resulting in major initiatives geared towards child protection. The functioning of Juvenile Justice Systems within the purview of law remains imperative here. Mandatory structuring has resulted in increasing instances of reporting as witnessed in India. The institutional positioning of children as perpetrators and victims in cases of sexual offence poses a social unease. It disturbs the notion of childhood; posing a problematic towards the conception and functioning of child protection as well. This paper seeks to interrogate the modalities of child protection as operative within the Juvenile Justice System in India.
Juvenile Justice System in India: Aims, Objectives, Failures, and Suggestions for Reform
The juvenile justice system was established to protect, rehabilitate, and reintegrate children who have come into conflict with the law. Globally, it seeks to balance justice with the welfare of the child, ensuring that their rights are protected and they are given a second chance at life. In India, the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, enacted and amended multiple times, mirrors these objectives. However, the implementation of this noble framework has often been riddled with challenges, failing to meet its intended goals. This paper traces the origins of the juvenile justice system from its global inception, examines the aims and objectives in the Indian context, and highlights the gaps between the law's promise and its practice. By analysing the failures in its execution, particularly the lack of proper infrastructure, training, and timely legal intervention, this paper proposes reforms to restore the juvenile justice system to its intended purpose. A robust system is essential for creating a society that truly prioritizes the rights of children and fosters their rehabilitation over punishment.
Juvenile Justice Rights in India
isara solutions, 2021
Juvenile means a child who is minor and who has not completed 18 years of age. India being a developing country, juvenile delinquency to be addressed as most serious problems a greater number of crimes are been committed by juvenile. However, it is a cause of concern in India It has been said that as long as children are allowed to suffer, no true love will be there in the world. Minors should be exempted from fines and punishments because the level of understanding of 7 year and 18-year-old is different. International conventions and treaties, are still in action to deal with the problem, standard legal guidelines are set for the rights of juveniles or children who come in contact or conflict with the law. United Nations Conventions on the Rights of the Child has widely ratified international directive principles through incorporating right consciousness into juvenile justice reforms. Worldwide many jurisdictions have accepted reformative and rehabilitation systems,
Juvenile Justice Systems in United States and India: Modern Scenario and Much Needed Modifications
Journal of Law and Criminal Justice, 2014
A criminal activity committed by adult which is in violation of law is considered as a crime and is punishable in law but if the same activity is committed by a child below a particular age, it is not considered a crime and is referred as juvenile delinquency no matter that a child with full understanding has committed a very serious, grave, grim and a heinous crime. How long it will be treated as justified and defensible? Seeing the nature of crime, presently, in United States of America States are shifting from rehabilitation model and are getting tougher on these so called juveniles but it is a misfortune that the same pattern is not followed in India, this in spite the fact that the most brutal, the most nasty, the most vicious , the most unruly of all the accusers in Delhi gang rape case held on December 16, 2012 was a juvenile. Undoubtedly the number of serious, monstrous and odious crimes committed by juveniles are mounting up every day as these young offenders very well know that they can easily get free even after committing such ferocious, heart piercing acts. The question here which really requires pond ration is can these persons be seriously called as innocent, blameless and naive persons? The answer is perhaps "No". When these persons can hatch a plot, churn their ideas to commit sinister, ominous offences like rape, murder, dacoity etc they can no more be called as innocent, guiltless persons and this rehabilitation model which has been till ages followed in so many countries should no more be applicable on such juveniles no matter what their age. Many countries have now after seeing the nature of crime committed by the young offenders changed their policy and are now moving towards tough reforms but in India, presently, it is seen that much importance is given to the age factor, rather, it will not be wrong to say that the only factor which is taken into consideration is the age factor of the juvenile. It is submitted that apart from the age , the severity of crime, the intention, the degree of atrocity etc should also be taken into consideration. The said paper focuses on the juvenile system in United States and India, the lacuna in the system, should age factor of a person play an important role in determining his culpability, his blameworthiness and what can be done to sort out this most menacing, most reprehensible and most appalling problem.
The Juvenile Justice System in India: From Welfare to Rights
Asian Journal of Criminology, 2007
This book is a macro-level examination of historical, legislative, executive, and judicial processes of juvenile justice in India, focusing on profiles of juveniles, patterns of juvenile delinquency, and the nature and scope of the juvenile justice system (Chapter 1). In addition, Chapter 1 critically evaluates the basic definition of 'child' and categories of juveniles under various juvenile justice acts. Chapter 2 nicely lays out the foundation for India's current juvenile justice system by tracing the status of children from the eighteenth century through the entire post-colonial period. The most significant period in the history of India's juvenile justice system started with the passage of The Madras Children Act 1920, modeled after the English Children Act 1908. The act included an age limit for childhood, prohibition against imprisonment for children of certain ages, and provisions to place children in certified schools or remand homes, depending upon their ages and offenses. Following the Madras example, several other provinces enacted similar legislation. Post-1950, the government of India has created the Planning Commission (1951), whose role, among others, is to increase funding for social welfare issues through implementation of Five-Year Plans. It was not until the Eighth Plan (1992) that the 'Girl Child' was recognized as an important asset for the country, thereby requiring that resources be set aside for development of India's female children. The Plan was also geared to prevent discrimination. The Ninth Plan further took notice of increasing delinquency, neglect, abuse, and exploitation, among other problems. On the legislative front, the Government of India followed the recommendations set forth by the Beijing Rules (1985) for a uniform juvenile justice law. More notably, Sheela Barse, a crusading journalist ultimately filed a public interest litigation for the release of juveniles illegally detained in jails by challenging the conditions of their detention. Her efforts resulted in not only in the removal of all children from jails, but also other developments in the field. One such development was the passage of the Juvenile Justice Act (JJA), which replaced the patchwork of prior juvenile legislation throughout India. The act provided for uniform definitions and judicial procedures for delinquent and neglected