ABSTRACT
This Article seeks to examine the state of juvenile justice system in India, and investigate whether the current legal framework envisages a reformative model or punitive model. The article initially discusses the existing legal framework, and then analyses a number of specific provisions envisaged in order to conclude regarding the same.
INTRODUCTION
In India, the Juvenile Justice Act, of 1986 was repealed, and the Juvenile Justice Act, of 2000 was enacted. The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act of 2000 serves as India’s primary legal framework for serving juvenile justice. This act was amended againin 2006 and 2010. Following the Delhi gang-rape (16th December 2012), the law received widespread criticism for its inability to combat crimes involving juveniles in heinous crimes like rape and murder. In December 2015, Parliament passed the Juvenile Justice Bill, 2014, which became the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015. Prior to the legislation of the 2015 Act the term “juvenile” referred to “a boy under the age of 16 and a girl under the age of 16 have reached the age of 18 “., the age used to uniform, which has now been changed to any person below the age of 18 years. The reason behind the commission of crime by a child, are numerous. The law, though legislated with reformatory intention, seems to be misused in some instances, thus it is imperative to see if the system that prevails at present truly caters to the reformation of juveniles or otherwise.
KEYWORDS
Juvenile Justice system in India, Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, Reformative theory, preventive theory.
MAIN BODY
The legal framework of juvenile justice system in India has evolved gradually over time through statutory interventions and judicial interpretations. The primary objective this system has bee to provide legal protection and ensure the welfare of all children by putting more emphasis of rehabilitation and reformation, rather than punitive initiatives. A young person who is a wrong-doer, who is under the age specified by the law, is called Juvenile delinquency. The 2015 Act, specifies different categories of such children such as, Children in need of care and protection, children in conflict with law and children in institutional care.
The preventive theory has always been prevalent over the years, with the objective of deterring the commission of crime in the future by punishing young offenders or isolating them from the society in order to maintain law and order. The preventive theory is the traditional approach that takes a narrow perspective on how the system is ought to be, and lacks analytical examination of the juvenile justice. On the other hand, the reformative theory revolves around the welfare of the offenders rather that deterrence. This theory supports the argument that mental faculties of young children does not possess the malice of an adult mind, hence it believes in reforming the mental capacity of the said offenders and thereby ensure that the crime is not repeated again.
As mentioned earlier, the Juvenile Justice (Care and protection of children) Act, 2015 serves as the main legal framework governing India’s juvenile justice system, replacing the earlier Juvenile Justice (care and protection of children) Act of 2000. The statute prescribes numerous provisions to ensure the safety, welfare and nourishment of children requiring protection as well as those involved in legal adjudications. Special procedures have been devised under Section 15 of the Act, to deal with serious criminals who are 16 to 18 years of age. The Juvenile justice board has the option of transferring instances of serious offences committed by adolescents to a children’s court after the completion of preliminary evaluation. A new chapter dedicated to orphans, abandoned children and surrendered children, has been envisaged, in the name, Central Adoption Resource Authority (CARA), with the mission to streamline adoption procedures for orphaned, abandoned and relinquished children more efficiently.
Within 6 months of the commencement of the Act, all child care institutions, irrespective of whether its run by the state government or not, that intend to give shelter to children entirely or partially, regardless of whether they receive government grants, are mandatorily required to be registered under the Act. The non-compliance of which, attracts severe penalties. The statute further envisages the initiation of multiple rehabilitation and social reintegration programs for children taken care by the system, to ensure their effortless reintegration into the society. The Act also provides for thorough examination and supervision of non-institutional methods of introducing children to family setting other than their biological family. These among other initiative enforced by the juvenile justice framework in India, imply the reformative object of the system. However, it is noteworthy that, despite being designed to be reformative, the juvenile system in India faces significant challenges in staying true to that objective the 2015 statute doesn’t consider the special needs and requirements of certain sub-groups among juveniles in conflict with law. This loophole is reflected in the fact that there is no stipulation or guideline for dealing with juvenile sex offenders, recidivists, female juveniles and children who are victims or offenders of other juvenile crime. The very introduction of the category of heinous crimes is itself a departure from the rehabilitative model of juvenile justice. Thus, the outcome of the legal framework of juvenile justice system can be described as a mostly reformative but partially punitive legal framework.
CONCLUSION
In essence, India’s juvenile justice system has evolved towards a reformative model, with the 2015 Act emphasizing rehabilitation and reintegration. However, provisions addressing heinous offences and the absence of guidelines for specific vulnerable sub-groups introduce a partial shift toward a punitive approach. While the framework largely upholds restorative ideals, ensuring true justice requires stronger implementation, sensitivity to diverse juvenile needs, and a consistent focus on reformation over punishment.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal falls into the category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
WRITTEN BY AYANA THERESA XAVIER
