ie

al Sc nce &
itic

Journal of Political Sciences & Public Sruti, J Pol Sci Pub Aff 2017, 5:4
l
urnal of Po

Pu
blic Af fairs
DOI: 10.4172/2332-0761.1000296

Affairs
Jo

ISSN: 2332-0761

Mini Review OMICS International

A Critical Analysis of Juvenile Justice Act and System in India

Sruti DK*
Kamala Nehru College, Delhi University, Delhi, India
*Corresponding author: Sruti DK, Kamala Nehru College, Delhi University, Delhi, India, Tel: +355 4 242 1806; E-mail: [email protected]
Received date: August 11, 2017; Accepted date: October 05, 2017; Published date: October 16, 2017
Copyright: © 2017 Sruti DK. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use,
distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Introduction Following nearer international attention to the problem of juvenile

justice within the late 1990’s, the problem emotional to the middle
Children are recognized worldwide as supremely assets of the state. stage even in domestic circles with variety of consultations continued
the longer term of the state lies within the hands of the kids, WHO are juvenile justice each nationwide and regionally.
recognized because the supremely assets of the state however as a
result of the indifferences of our society all told spheres, these future
stake holders aren't cited properly that results in kid delinquency.
Juvenile Systems in Other Countries
Children or delinquency is Associate in nursing alarmingly increasing The Unites States has drawn a transparent distinction between
downside inflicting a supply of concern all told over the globe. juveniles as victims of Associate in Nursing unresponsive society and
Children need to be the topic of prime focus of development people who are absolutely conscious of the inhumanity of their crimes.
designing, research, and welfare in Asian country however sadly, it's The legislation of the country permits in sure cases, keeping in mind
not been therefore. Despite the Constitutional vision of a healthy and the inhumanity of the crime committed, to undertake juvenile
happy kid protected against abuse and exploitation, and a National offenders as adults. The justification offered behind this release is to
Policy for youngsters, the bulk of kids in Asian country still live while recognize the inherent and every one necessary principle of planning
not a cared, protected and substantive childhood [1,2]. or compunction.
India could be a soul to world organization Declaration on The Another justification offered is that the prime responsibility of the
Rights of the kid, 1959 that outlined and recognized varied Rights of State to shield society from such offenders. By waiving its jurisdiction
the kids namely: the proper to health and care, the proper to protection the tribunal recognizes that the wrongdoer is on the far side the scope
from abuse, the proper to protection from exploitation, right to of juvenile rehabilitation and legitimizes the release of jurisdiction as a
protection from neglect, right to info, right to expression and right to way of protective society at massive from the wrongdoer.
nutrition etc. are outlined as basic rights of kids by the Convention of
the rights of the kid. Consequently, Asian country has adopted a Australia too follows a system almost like the UK. Coming back to
national policy on kids in 1974 for achieving the on top of aforesaid Asian country and therefore the Juvenile Justice Act 2000, it's
rights for its kids. The primary central legislation on Juvenile Justice straightforward to note that instead of have versatile procedures for
was passed in 1986, by the Union Parliament, thereby providing an sentencing we've opted for a rigid and sweeping one. this is often a
even law on juvenile justice for the complete country. Before these laws system within which the utmost quantity of sentence served by a
there were many other laws regarding the same matter were in delinquent WHO say partakes in heist so as to feed himself is that the
existence in every country all over the world. But those were not same same because the one given resolute a serial malefactor or murderer;
or uniform. So the primary uniform law on juvenile justice but failed with great care long each are below eighteen years archaic [6,7].
to lead to any dramatic improvement within the treatment of juveniles.
The law continued to electrify plenty of concern, in human rights Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act, 2015
circles, pertaining not able to the method juveniles were treated in
The frightful incident of raised several debates. And therefore the
detention centers selected as special homes and juvenile homes.
prime issue among these was the involvement of the juvenile offender,
WHO was solely six months short from turning into adult142. This
Meaning of the Word Juvenile attracts the law of Juvenile Justice (care and protection) Act, 2000143
Someone who is below the age of eighteen is named as a Juvenile. and therefore the offender was sentenced by the court just for three-
year confinement144. Against this call of Apex Court, many protests
were created, that demanded modification within the existing Juvenile
History of Juvenile Justice Act Justice Law145.
In 1986 a statue came into force for the purpose of the protection of However, this case isn't solely reason for the govt. to introduce this
juveniles after that many other laws also came into force. Before this bill. The Ministry of girls and kid Development even the introduction
law every state had its own enactment on juvenile justice with their of bill with many alternative reasons. The prime 2 reasons of all were,
being variations within the method juveniles were treated by first, the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 was facing implementation and
completely different state legal systems. The primary uniform law on procedural delays146. Secondly, the National Crime Records Bureau
juvenile justice but failed to lead to any dramatic improvement within (NCRB) Reports indicate increase within the Juvenile Crime between
the treatment of juveniles. The law continued to electrify plenty of the people of 16-18 years (i.e.1% in 2003 toone.2% in 2013)147. Beside
concern, in human rights circles, pertaining notably to the method the large proponents, there have been some kid activists, WHO
juveniles were treated in detention centers selected as special homes criticized this Act on several grounds: initial, stating it to be retributive
and juvenile homes [3-5]. not helpful [8-10].

J Pol Sci Pub Aff, an open access journal Volume 5 • Issue 4 • 1000296
ISSN: 2332-0761
Citation: Sruti DK (2017) A Critical Analysis of Juvenile Justice Act and System in India. J Pol Sci Pub Aff 5: 296. doi:
10.4172/2332-0761.1000296

Page 2 of 2

The introduction of The New Juvenile Justice (care and Protection of behavior of juveniles. Among them 2 common theories are
children), 2015, has introduced a number of the exceptional changes Psychodynamic theory and Social Learning theory. Psychodynamic
within the existing Juvenile Law. One in every of such major changes Theory was formally projected by Sigmund Freud 182, that states that a
is, juvenile archaic cluster of sixteen to eighteen are to be tried like toddler is born with Id (animal instinct) and ego is that the realization
Associate in Nursing adult. Also, the one who has earned the age of of real world and helps to regulate Id. Superego is developed through
twenty one whereas in sentence are send to the jail for remainder of the and superego cannot management the animal instinct and therefore
time span. However, of these choices are taken by the Juvenile Justice the juvenile become delinquent. 183 Another theory is Social learning
Board. This paper has highlighted on varied polemical problems regard theory, that states that {kid|a toddler|a baby} is sweet once born
to} new Juvenile Justice Act with special reference to the views of however encompassing setting influence his or her nature as a result of
various activists. Beside this, the paper has centered on the anticipated child forever learns from imitating elders. 184 but, in each the cases,
scenario which can arise once the New Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 are the role of oldsters, society and setting are crucial .The reasons behind
browse with Protection of kids from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and a Juvenile to become criminal is several. This might be on the far side
Prohibition of kid wedding Act, 2006 [11-16]. the management of the immature tyke. All told these cases, giving
social control to the juvenile, United Nations agency is in conflict with
Related Case Laws law not forever an answer, as acknowledged by academic. Thus,
considering of these things in mind, author thinks that it's necessary
• A 3 decide Bench call of Supreme Court just in case of Umesh for the govt. to rethink and examine child-friendly amendments within
Chandra Vs. State of Rajasthan, control that: - “As regards the final the new Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 so injustice in Juvenile Justice Act
relevancy of the Act, we tend to are clearly of the read that the (Faizan Mustafa).
relevant date for the relevancy of the Act is that the date on that the
offence takes place. Juveniles Act was enacted to shield young kids
References
from the implications of their criminal acts on the footing that
their mind at that age couldn't be aforementioned to be mature for 1. Sharma RN (2008) Criminology and Penology. Surjeet Publications.
imputing men’s space as within the case of associate adult. This 2. Witerdyk AJ (2004) Juvenile Justice System: International Perspectives,
being the intendment of the Act, a transparent finding has got to Models and Trends.
be recorded that the relevant date for relevancy of the Act is that 3. Government of India (2000) The Juvenile Justice Act, 1986’ and The
the date on that the offence takes place...We are clearly of the read juvenile Justice (Care and protection) Act, 2000’ Publication Division,
that the relevant date for relevancy of the Act up to now as age of New Delhi.
the defendant, United Nations agency claims to be a toddler, 4. Government of India (The Apprentices) (1850) Act, 1850’ Publication
worries, is that the date of the prevalence and not the date of the division, New Delhi.
trial.” 5. Government of India (1860) The Indian Penal code (1860). Publication
division New Delhi.
• In 2000 there seemed to be a shift within the read of the Hon’ble
6. Government of India (1876) The Reformatory School Act. Publication
Supreme Court it discovered within the case of Arnit Das Vs. State division New Delhi.
of province, that: “So much because the gift context worries we
7. Madras Children Act (1920).
tend to are clear in our mind that the crucial date of crucial the
question whether or not someone may be a juvenile is that the date 8. Bengal Children Act (1922).
once he's brought before the competent authority”. 9. Bombay Children Act (1924).
• This important issue was another time thought of by a 5 decide 10. Government of India (1960) The Children Act (1960). Publication
division New Delhi.
Bench just in case of Pratap Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand and it
absolutely was control that:-“The reckoning date for the 11. Mahrukh A (2006) Child and Protection and Juvenile Justice System: for
Juvenile in conflict with Law. Children India Foundation.
determination of the age of the juvenile is that the date of the
12. Government of India (2000) The Juvenile Justice (care and Protection of
offence and not the date once he's made before the authority or children) Act. Publication division, New Delhi.
within the court”.
13. Government of India (1860) The Indian Penal code. Publication division,
• Navin Pawar v State chance of repetition of crime isn't any ground New Delhi.
to reject bail. 14. Government of India (2000) The Juvenile Justice (care and Protection of
• Gurudev v State Custody of kid bimanual over to father United children) Act (2000). Publication division, New Delhi.
Nations agency was a govt. servant not withstanding rejection of 15. Government of India (2000) Supreme Court cases’, In Jaya mala V. Hom
bail by lower courts on the bottom of ethical, physical or Secretary, (2010) Bhoop Ram V. state of UP case, (1989) Babloo Passi and
psychological danger. V. state of Jharkhand, (2010) In Umesh Chandra. V. state of Rajastan,
(2005) Arnit Das V. state of Bihar.
• Master Abhishek v State what's going to quantity to “defeating the
ends of justice…” 16. Government of India (2000) Supreme Court cases’, Bhoop Ram V. state of
Up, (1989) and Arnit Das V. state of Bihar.
• Shashi Immanuel Kant Saini v State, the observations in created in
SIR is a fabric thought for grant of bail.

Conclusion
Before closing, it's necessary to debate some theories which can
facilitate in understanding the explanation behind the delinquent

J Pol Sci Pub Aff, an open access journal Volume 5 • Issue 4 • 1000296
ISSN: 2332-0761