Legal Services India - Law Articles is a Treasure House of Legal Knowledge and information, the law resources is an ever growing database of authentic legal information.
Legal Services India

» Home
Tuesday, December 3, 2024

Juvenile Justice And Its Procedure In India

Posted in: Juvenile Laws
Tue, Jun 23, 20, 23:30, 5 Years ago
star star star star star
4 out of 5 with 17 ratings
comments: 15 - hits: 49304
This Article Gives A Bare Idea About What Are The Procedures And Laws Regarding Trial Of The Juvenile Offenders.

Children are the paragon of development and future of a nation. So a safe and healthy environment must be provided for utmost nurture of their character. Also India, is a home to the largest child population. But in recent time we witnessed , a high rate of juvenile offences in India, which is a major concern.

A child is born innocent , and he must be bestowed with a holistic physical, mental,moral and spiritual development to make them one of the duty bound citizen of this largest democracy. But subsequently children due to several factors, whatsoever it may be,turns them into juvenile delequent. Which means transforming an innocent child to a juvenile offender.

Thus our criminal jurisprudence, regarding juvenile offenders says that , prevention is better than cure regarding juveniles and they must be protected from going in a wrong path, and that is the cause why our Indian judicial system gives emphasis on Reformatory form of punishment to a juvenile offender. Also our constitution provides for a separate treatment for children.

The word juvenile originated from a latin word juvenis, which means young . And legally the definition of juvenile has been provided under section 2(k) of, The Juvenile Justice ( care and protection of children) Act,2000. Which provides that juvenile or child means a person who has not completed eighteenth year of age.
 

Significant Legislation For Juvenile Justice

A separate justice system is provided for dealing with the juveniles in India. It is concerned that when the juveniles are left upon on the same judicial mechanism or procedure like as of the adult offenders , then the juvenile may themselves gets victimise by the system itself. It is based on the principal of Doli Incapax( child cannot procure criminal intention )Thus it had developed a different kind of justice system, both in respect of its procedure and facilities,like manner of interrogation of children by police, attitude of the lawyers , perception of judges regarding decision of guilt , handling by prison staff,living, educational, recreational conditions, safety purposes also program of rehabilitation and reintegration.

The nation introduced a separate legislation for dealing with the juvenile offenders .The first enactment was done was Juvenile Justice Act,1986. Which mainly deals with both neglected juveniles and delequent juveniles. Neglected juveniles are those who are found begging, homeless,destitute,living in brothel,exploited for illegal and immoral purpose, and delequent juveniles are the one who are in conflict with law or have committed an offence.

This Act provided for separate institution for processing, treatment , rehabilitation of the neglected and delequent children, and also says about involvement of many agencies at various stages to deal with juvenile justice process. But in reality the 1986s Act made a wide gap between its principles and its implementation. Maximum states of India were lacking basic infrastructure like juvenile welfare Boards, courts, observation homes, rehabilitation centres etc. Also the international concern regarding the juvenile justice and care , pressurized the government to submit report regarding the rights of the child and their achievements in the country, which geared up the Ministry for Social Justice and empowerment , to an effective law for the juvenile. Finally which led to the enactment of Juvenile Justice (care and protection of children)Act,2000. This Act amended the laws relating to the juveniles, procedure of providing justice to juveniles and also to approach a child friendly adjudication and disposition of matters . The competent authority set up to deal with the matter of juveniles was Juvenile Justice Board.

The board shall consist of a magistrate and two social worker out of which one must be a women,having special knowledge on child psychology and child welfare. Another amendment came was Juvenile Justice(care and protection of children) amendment Act,2006, with an aim to widen the juvenile justice and care framework in consistent with child centric and family type rehabiliation.

But after the Nirbhaya rape case , where one of the accused was a juvenile, a few months shorter than 18 years of age, sentence to 3 years in reformative home, which was not adequate with the heinous crime done . This shooked the public ponderance over the Act, and debated for reduction of the juvenility age from 18 to 16. So the legislature came with The Juvenile Justice ( Care and Protection) Act, 2015, which included that any child between the age of 13 to 18 if committed any heinous crime , will be tried as an adult. Also the recent Act have categorized the offences, petty offences ( crime for which maximum punishment is upto 3 years), Serious offence ( crime for which punishment is between 3 to 7 years), Heinous offence ( crime for which punishment is 7 years or more ). And different procedure have been provided for categorization of such offences.
 

Procedure Of Juvenile Justice , Trial And Detention

The constitution of India also provides some protection of the child for their holistic development. Like Right to free and compulsory education to child between 6-14 years of age ( art 21A) , Right to protection from hazardous employment under years of age ( art 24) , Right of proper standard of living and good nutrition ( art 47) etcetera.

Also the major criminal laws, Indian penal code 1860, Code of criminal procedure 1973 intends to try the juvenile offenders separately from the adult one. Section 82 of IPC says Nothing is an offence which is done by a child under seven years of age .Section 83 of IPC enlist Nothing is an offence which is done by a child above seven years and under 12 years of age , who has not attained the sufficient maturity of understanding in order tojudge the nature and consequence of his act on that particular occasion. Section 27 of CRPC says that Any offence which is not punishable with death or life imprisonment , which is committed by a person below the age of 16 years , may be tried by a court which is specially empowered under the children Act to decide on such matters. Or it can be dealt with by any other law for time being in force which is providing for treatment , training , rehabiliatation of young offenders . Section 437 of CRPC lays down that ,a juvenile in conflict with law can apply for anticipatory bail.

Subsequently for a better catering of justice for juvenile a special legislation was legislated, Juvenile Justice (care and protection of children)Act to provide justice specially to the juvenile in a child friendly procedure. If it is believed that any child have comiitted a crime ,they can be arrested by the police mainly by child welfare police officer ( section 10 of JJ Act,2015), provided that if they arrest is done by any regular police officer, then the child must be immediately placed before Juvenile police unit.

Some procedure like no handcuffing by the police, no exertion of force is allowed during arrest. And the parents of the child must be immediately informed. The child cannot be kept in a regular jail, rather must be kept in observation home before production to the Juvenile Justice Board within 24 hours of arrest. The police officer also must prepare a Social Investigation Report containing the details about the family background of the child , which the help the JJB to take decision.

Juvenile justice procedure have categorized the offence into 3 types, petty , serious and heinous. JJB must complete the inquiry within 4 months . for petty and serious offence the police are not supposed to register FIR, they can only record in the general diary along with Social Background Report . only in heinous offence the police can register FIR.

If any child above 16 but below 18 years of age, have committed any heinous offence will be tried in adult procedure not child friendly procedure of JJACT. And he will be send to the children’s court ( section 18 of JJ Act). And maximum punishment for heinous crime ,can pass a sentence of more than 3 years but not death penalty or life imprisonement.

And if any child below 16 years of age committed any crime, will be tried by the Juvenile Justice Board , in a child friendly procedure (informal procedure and strict confidentiality ), and maximum sentence can be imposed upto 3 years , and can only be detained in observation home for reformative purpose.

All proceedings , the JJB or Children’s Court must ensure child friendly environment , and must also ensure that the child is sent to place of safety during proceeding , if detained. And for committing heinous crime , he must be kept at place of safety , till he becomes 21 years of age, after he can be sent to jail ( section 20 JJAct, 2015). The child shall also have access to all reformative service( education, schooling, skill development ).

In Satbir Singh & others v. State of Haryana, [AIR 2005 SC 3549] SC reiterated that for determining whether accused is juvenile or not , the date of birth in school records shall be taken into consideration by JJB.
 

Juvenile Courts

Juvenile court which is also recognise as children’s court situated to handling problems of delinquent, neglected, or abused children. It is sine qua non,to accomplish the proceeding of the court informally and paternally,so that the juvenile can be treated in a cozy and child accustomed way. Under this Juvenile Justice law and provisions of the Criminal Code Procedure, childrens are not to be taken to a regular criminal courts, the purpose of a separate court is socio-legal rehabilitation and reformation instead of punishment. Two types of cases are processed by a juvenile court: civil matters, usually concerning care of an abandoned child or one whose parents cannot support him; and criminal matters arising from antisocial behaviour by the child.

Now regarding the courts where the juvenile are tried, if the juveniles are found to be below the age of 16 years , he will be tried by the Juvenile Justice Board. JJB consist of a , Metropolitan Magistrate or Judicial Magistrate First Class but , not being Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or Chief Judicial Magistrate. And two social workers (one being a woman ) with experience of 7 years in health, education or welfare activities pertaining to children or, a practising professional with a degree in child psychology, psychiatry, sociology or law. And maximum of 3 years of sentence can be passed.

Secondly if the juvenile is between the age of 16-18, and have committed a heinous crime as mentioned under Juvenile Justice Act,2015, he will be tried by the Children’s court as an adult .The children’s court may be an existing court of session , that is dealing with child specific laws, or special court which is set up for the purpose of dealing with crimes under JJ Act. And can pass sentence more than 3 years but not death penalty and life imprisonment . If the child is found guilty of heinous offence, he will be sent the observatory home till 21 years of age, after he will be sent to jail.

The Juvenile justice Act,2015 also mandates for setting up of Juvenile Justice Boards and Child Welfare Committees in every district.

Conclusion
The children who are not born criminal , are being transformed due to diabolical social environment and a non deterrent law. So a different justice procedure is provided by JJ Act. And it can be efficacious from the root only if the observatory home are being administered with uttermost care and affection ,where the maximum part of reformation of the child is done.

But is most of the observatory home , it has been witnessed that , most of the juveniles are being drug addicted, living in filthy environment, no effective educational classes are conducted, which will not suffice the puropose of juvenile justice. Beside a good law , a strong implementation is also the need of the hour.

Legal Services India

Comments

There are no comments for this article.
Only authorized users can leave comments. Please sign in first, or register a free account.
Share
Sponsor
About Author
SANDIP PAUL
Member since Jun 14, 2020
Location: n/a
Following
User not following anyone yet.
You might also like
It must be lauded right at the outset the landmark judgment delivered by the Uttarakhand High Court on June 1, 2018 which shall benefit all those mentally ill children who have to face untold sufferings and discrimination
Protection of Child And Juvenile Under Indian Contract Act 1872
Below are Listed Various Views on The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Amendment) Bill of 2019 expressed by various Member of Parliament
Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 aims to replace the existing Indian Juvenile Delinquency Law, Juvenile Justice Act, 2000, so that juveniles in conflict with the law in the age group 16-18, involved in Heinous Offences, can be tried as adults.
Two Commissions National Child Rights Commission and State Child Rights Commissions start squabbling amongst themselves over powers to conduct inquiry National Commission For Protection of Child Rights v/s Dr Rajesh Kumar
S. Jai Singh v. State Despite the legislative framework that by all means seek to eliminate corporal punishment, the practice has been persistently followed by schools and institutions across the country. How can this be ever tolerated?
Km. Rachna vs UP an order passed by a Judicial Magistrate or Child Welfare Committee sending victim to women protection homes/child care homes cannot be challenged or set aside in a writ of habeas corpus.
Rajendra @ Rajappa vs Karnataka exercise of its criminal appellate jurisdiction that only contradictions in material particulars and not minor contradictions can be a ground to discredit the testimony of the witnesses.
child rapists are steadily rising at a meteoric pace yet we witness that the punishment meted out is not just grossly inadequate
MP v/s Irfan has upheld the death sentence awarded to two men accused of gang rape of an eight year old girl.
Clause (3) of Article 15 of the Constitution empowers the State to make special provisions for children. Going forward, Article 39 also contains various safeguards for children's benefit.
Court on its own motion v State Delhi High Court has ordered that investigating officers probing offences committed by juveniles should obtain documents related to age proof and ensure that the ossification test for determination of age is done within 15 days from the date the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) issues such directions.
Attorney General for India v. Satish touching a child with sexual intent even through clothing is an offence of sexual assault under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act thus setting aside two separate decisions of the Bombay High Court
Ashok vs Madhya Pradesh the claim of juvenility can be raised before any Court, at any stage, even after disposal of the case. So there should be no more confusion anymore pertaining to this
Ayaan Ali v/s Uttarakhand was finally delivered on February 16, 2022, the Uttarakhand High Court in light of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015
Jaya Chakravarti v/s Madhya Prades refused to pass an order of child custody in favour of the Appellant-mother, upon noting that the children themselves had expressed their inclination to reside with their father.
Yogendra Kumar Mishra v. U.P. that was reserved on 31.03.2022 and then finally pronounced on 06.04.2022 has minced just no words to observe that if anyone has been declared as an absconder/proclaimed offender under Section 82 CrPC, he is not entitled to relief of anticipatory bail.
Soumen Biswas @ Litan Biswas vs West Bengal Special Courts to ensure a smooth, prompt and seamless examination of the minor victim of sexual offences.
Vinod Katara vs Uttar Pradesh that lodging juveniles in adult prisons amounts to deprivation of their personal liberty.
Manoj Kumar Vs Haryana that child rape cases are the cases of the worst form of lust for sex, where children of tender age are not even spared in the pursuit of sexual pleasure.
Muhammed Yasin vs Station House Officer that while hearing an application for cancellation of bail, even of an accused booked under the POCSO Act, an opportunity of hearing must be accorded to the accused.
Shri Manik Sunar Vs Meghalaya that was filed by the petitioner-accused who was charged with offences under POCSO and IPC, ordered for the quashing of the offences on grounds that the alleged victim was in a consensual relationship with the accused.
Neena George vs Alwin K Jacob settled position of law that while considering custody matters, Court must pass orders ensuring that the child is not totally deprived of the love, affection and company of one of the parents.
Neena George vs Alwin K Jacob that while considering custody matters, Court must pass orders ensuring that the child is not totally deprived of the love, affection and company of one of the parents.
Anand Kumar vs Lakhan Jatav that his paramilitary background would work to the advantage of the child for his overall growth and personality development.
Shadab Ansari v/s Madhya Pradesh has upheld the decision of the Trial Court to close the rights of the accused in POCSO case nothing that they were indulging in dilatory tactics to defer the minor prosecutrix from testifying.
ABC v Haryana that the plea of juvenility can be raised by a person even after the disposal of the case in terms of conviction and sentence, as per which plea, the authorities shall be bound to conduct an age determination inquiry.
Shubham @ Bablu Milind Suryavanshi v. Maharashtra that on being tried as an adult, the juvenile is not denuded of the statutory right available to him under Section 12 of the Act.
Master X th. Shah Wali Vs J&K that a Sessions Court or a Children’s Court cannot entertain a revision petition against the order of Juvenile Justice Board.
Nesar Ahmed Khan vs Orissa that Muslims cannot seek adoption of minor children under their personal laws and they must strictly follow the prescriptions laid down under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act (‘JJ Act’) to undertake any such adoption.
Rahul Chandel Jatav v/s Madhya Pradesh Government of India to think, deliberate and contemplate about reducing the consent age of the victim from 18 to 16 years in rape cases as defined by the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act
Ajay Yadav vs UP that it is very unfortunate that nowadays, in maximum cases women are filing false FIRs under the POCSO/SC-ST Act using it as a weapon to grab money from the State and this practice should stop.
Bachpan Bachao Andolan vs UOI What is the real icing on the cake in this notable judgment is the most commendable directions that were issued for framing the guidelines on their appointment to the State of Uttar Pradesh since the case was pertaining to an incident in UP.
Prem Kumar vs Statevery rightly quashed a first information report (FIR) that was registered under provision of Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) and Section 376 (rape) of IPC
Debarti Nandee vs Ms Tripti Gurha that were made to the Adoption Rules under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 clarifying that the right to adopt children is not a fundamental right.
G Raghu Varma vs Karnataka that the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act was not meant to criminalize consensual sexual relationships between adolescents, but to protect them from sexual abuse.
Showkat Ahmad Mir vs Nighat Begum that the custody of a child with his father can, in no circumstances, be termed as illegal confinement amounting to an offence as the father happens to be the natural guardian of the minor child
Surjeet Khanna vs Haryana that it is mandatory for a parent to inform about the offence against child to the police under Section 19 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act).
Ganesh Balai vs Madhya Pradesh That there is no reason to reject the testimony of a child of tender age per se has upheld the conviction and sentence that was passed by the Trial Court in a murder case that was primarily based on the evidence of an 8-year-old child who was the sole eye witness to the murder.
Sebin Thomas vs Kerala that accidental or automatic downloading of child pornography without intent does not constitute an offence under Section 67B of the Information Technology Act, provided no evidence of intent is shown.
X Vs Uttarakhand while extending bail to a juvenile accused in a case registered under Sections 376(3), 506 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), and Section 5(j)(ii)/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences
Sister Mercy @ Elizabeth Jose (Devasiya) vs Chhattisgarh that subjecting the child to corporal punishment for reforming him/her cannot be part of education.
Sahil vs NCT of Delhi that POCSO Act is being misapplied as cases are being filed at the behest of the girl’s family who object to her friendship and romantic involvement with a young boy.
Protection of Children From Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, that POCSO Act has become a tool for exploitation and it was never meant to criminalize consensual romantic relationships between adolescents.
Ramji Lal Bairwavs Rajasthan the Rajasthan High Court had quashed the matter that was primarily based on a ‘compromise’ between the victim’s father and teacher.
Top