JAMIA MILLIA

ISLAMIA
FACULTY OF LAW

CRIMINOLOGY ASSIGNMENT
On

“THE JUVENILE JUSTICE ACT, 2000”

Submitted to: MR. RASHEED CA

Submitted by: TAHA AHMAD

Course: - BA. LLB (Hons.), Vth sem

Roll no. – 37, Sec : B

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I am feeling highly elated to work on the topic “Juvenile Justice Act

2000” under guidance of Prof. Rasheed CA. I am very grateful to him for heis
exemplary guidance. I would like to enlighten my readers regarding this topic
and I hope I have tried my best to pave the way for bringing more luminosity
to this topic.
INTRODUCTION

In India, The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 1 (as
amended in 20152) (hereinafter referred to as the Juvenile Justice Act) was
implemented to protect the rights of the children in conflict with law. A child in
conflict with law cannot be treated in the same way as adults who have offended
the provisions of law. A child is vulnerable and immature and providing a
congenial environment is the primary obligation of a State. He/ she needs to be
protected and treated with care and affection to prevent any mental trauma
which can be caused if the child is exposed to the atrocities of the legal system.
Taking this into account, the Indian government (as well as many international
governments) have made laws to safeguard the rights of the children in conflict
with law.

A ‘child in conflict with law’ (hereinafter called as the delinquent juvenile) is a

person who has not yet completed 18 years of age on the date of commission of
the offence3. There is a difference on how the law perceives delinquent juvenile
and other offenders. Generally, it is the police who arrests the delinquent
juvenile and produces him before the Juvenile Justice Board (hereinafter
referred to as the Board). Consequently, the first contact that the alleged
delinquent juvenile has, with the legal system, is the police. It is the police who
files the chargesheet (a record made in a police station of the charges against a
person) before the competent authority after investigating the case. The
atrocities of police are not unheard of even in the Juvenile Justice system, which
has a detrimental impact on the delinquent juvenile.

1
The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, No. 56, Acts of Parliament, 2000 (India).
2
The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, No. 2, Acts of Parliament, 2015 (India).
3
Section 2(14) The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, No. 2, Acts of Parliament,
2015 (India).
Certain issues such as bail under the Juvenile Justice Act, treatment by the
police of delinquent juveniles and use of handcuffs and fetters on delinquent
juveniles have been discussed in the paper.

ISSUES OF BAIL UNDER THE JUVENILE JUSTICE

(Care and Protection) ACT, 2000

Considerations for grant of bail under Juvenile Justice Act are very different
from those under criminal law. Under Juvenile Justice Act, bail is generally
perceived as a matter of right of the child and none of the considerations which
are generally applied under criminal law are to be taken into account in a
proceeding under Juvenile Justice Act. Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care
and Protection) Act, 2000 deals with the issue of bail. If there is an area in
Juvenile Justice proceedings where 'trappings' of criminal law are very apparent
in practice, it is ‘bail’. Contrary to the said law, in practice, across the country,
law on bail under Juvenile Justice Act continues to be dominated by criminal
law.

The relevant section4 dealing with bails of delinquent juveniles is reproduced

below:

12. Bail of juvenile – (1) when any person accused of a

bailable or non bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is
arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board,
such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 or in any other law for the
time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety
(or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or
under the care of any fit institution or fit person) but he shall

4
Section 12, The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, No. 2, Acts of Parliament, 2015
(India).
 not be so released if there appear no reasonable grounds for
believing that the release is likely to bring him into association
with any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or
psychological danger or that his release would defeat the ends
of justice.

Section 12 provides for the bail for delinquent juveniles irrespective of whether
the allegation made against them constitutes a bailable or a non-bailable
offence. While dealing with matters regarding the bail of delinquent juveniles,
the Board while deciding to keep the delinquent juvenile in protective custody is
not required to consider the offence alleged against the delinquent juvenile
rather it has to take into account his/ her interests and developmental needs.
Thus, the role of the delinquent juvenile in the offence; the nature of offence
allegedly committed by the delinquent juvenile; gravity of offence, etc. are not
the considerations before the Board when it entertains the bail application of a
delinquent juvenile. Hence, the delinquent juveniles are to be kept in protective
custody if the Board forms an opinion that the release will put him/ her under
potential danger of moral, physical or social kinds.

The Delhi High Court in a case cited as Master Niku Chaubey v. State5 had
declined to entertain the plea of the State to cancel a bail application of the
delinquent juvenile and observed:

“…that the alleged act said to have been committed by the

juvenile along with the co-accused was one of great moral
degradation and the act in itself would demonstrate the
perversity of the mind of the juvenile”(Para 4)

“...the nature of offence is not one of the ground on which bail

can be granted or refused to the juvenile.”(Para 4)

5
Niku Chaubey v. State, (2006) D.L.T. 577 (India).
The Delhi High Court while interpreting the words “would defeat ends of
justice” as one of the grounds for denying the bail to a delinquent juvenile held
that6:

“the factors for determining as to what amounts to defeat of

the ends of justice must be construed in the context of the
purpose of the Act. It was indicated in the said decision that
what needs to be adopted is a child- friendly approach in the
adjudication and disposition of matters in the best interest of
children and for their ultimate rehabilitation through various
institutions established under the enactment. What is
important is that the Court should keep in mind the
developmental needs of the juvenile and the necessity for his
rehabilitation. It is only if the developmental needs of the child
require that he be kept in custody or that keeping him in
custody is necessary for his rehabilitation or care or
protection that his release would defeat the ends of justice, not
otherwise.” (Para 3)

Thus, the legal as well as the authoritatively settled preposition of law is that the
bail of the delinquent juvenile is to be denied if his/ her release interferes with
his/ her developmental needs.

Gravity of offence is no ground for denying bail

Gravity of offence is not a consideration before Juvenile Justice Board because

it does not award punishment. Juvenile Justice Board decides whether a child
has come in conflict with law or not. If the answer is in affirmative, then it
inquires about the factors which brought the juvenile to a state of delinquency,

6
Dev Vrat (Minor) v. Govt of NCT of Delhi (2006) decided on 14 September, 2006.
and then decides on further course of action which could reform, mainstream
and rehabilitate the delinquent juvenile.

The delinquent juveniles are entitled to bail by the very fact that they are
juveniles and the mandate of law is to grant them bail. Bail can be denied only
if the Board concludes that the release is not going to be in the interest of the
child. If the child is from a stable family, members of which are ready to take
care of him, bail should mandatorily be given.

The underlying rationales are that youth are developmentally different from
adults and that their behaviour is malleable, thus there should always be an
effort to help them in developing a better conduct rather than punishing them.

Keeping a delinquent juvenile in protective custody is not considered the

appropriate method for correcting a delinquent juvenile for various reasons. A
child while in institution may have to face emotional deprivation, separation
anxiety, low self-esteem, failure to trust, developmental delays, excessive
routinization/regimentation, physical abuse & trauma, difficulty in main
streaming & adjusting when he comes out, inter-personal relationship problems,
anonymity etc. which will hamper with his normal development and growth.

As per the authoritatively settled proposition of law also, the bail can be denied
to a child only if his/ her release interferes with his/ her growth, and/or exposes
him/ her to any kind of social, moral, physical or legal danger. The words
‘would defeat the ends of justice’ cannot be stretched to bring into its ambit the
gravity of the offence or the interest of the victim.
USE OF FETTERS AND HANDCUFFS ON
DELINQUENT JUVENILES

Judicial cognizance by the Board with regard to the lapses and violations in the
administration of justice results in systematic reforms. Children in conflict with
law who have been victims of circumstances and neglect, also face stigma,
contempt and hatred. The Board has a duty to productively eliminate these evils
from the Juvenile Justice Administration System and the first step is to take
cognizance and only then can the reforms be brought about.

At times delinquent juveniles have been brought to the Board handcuffed. In

certain instances, they are made to wait outside the premises of the Board with
police officials. The children who are summoned from other jurisdictions are
not kept at the waiting hall but are made to sit outside and wait there with
policemen, often handcuffed, exposed to the public.

Rule 76 of the Delhi Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules
2009, prohibits the use of fetters.

Rule 76: Prohibition on the use of handcuffs and fetters. No

child or the juvenile in conflict with law dealt with under the
provisions of the Act and the rules made there under shall be
handcuffed or fettered.

The Rule corresponds to the model rules framed by Government of India: ‘The
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007 7 (hereinafter
called as the Juvenile Justice Rules).’

The rule is categoric in its terms and puts a clear restriction on use of fetters and
handcuffs on the delinquent juveniles. The act of putting the delinquent
juveniles under fetters was not only in violation with the Rules aforementioned
7
The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007, No. 33, Acts of Parliament, 2006 (India).
but is also against the Fundamental Principles of Juvenile Justice and Protection
of Children. Principle II (a) of the Fundamental Principles of Juvenile Justice
and Protection of Children contemplates that the treatment given to the child
while he is in the system of care and protection should be consistent with the
child’s dignity and worth8. It further declares that dignity includes personal
identity, respecting one's space and not being humiliated, labelled or
stigmatized.

Unfortunately, when the delinquent juveniles stand outside the Board

handcuffed, all the above rights are violated. The delinquent juveniles are
demeaned in the eyes of passer-by’s, who look at them as criminals in
handcuffs. Few police officials also admit that the delinquent juveniles are
handcuffed. Moreover, they are not aware of the provisions of Juvenile Justice
Acts and Rules. This again is a very sorry state. If the people who have the onus
of implementing the law are not aware of it, the implementation cannot be
ensured. Hence there is a dire need to spread awareness on the law related to
delinquent juveniles and sensitizing the society on the issues related to the
delinquent juveniles.

In this regard, directions have also been issued to ensure that the officials, who
deal with the delinquent juveniles, are conversant with the provisions of the
‘Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act, 2000’ and the Rules framed
thereunder. The responsibility has also been imposed upon the police officials in
the Board to take care of the children who are brought in for production before
the Board and guide the officials accompanying the children to the waiting hall.
They shall ensure that no handcuffs or fetters are used, and shall inform the
Board in the event of any violation. The children who are produced from other
jurisdictions and do not have a counsel to assist them, shall first be taken to the
Legal Aid Cell.
8
Chapter II, The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007, No. 33, Acts of Parliament,
2006 (India).
POLICE TREATMENT OF JUVENILES: Juvenile
Justice Act or Criminal Law?

How should the police behave with the juveniles in conflict with law is one of
the main issues. There have been instances where the children have protested
against the treatment meted out to them and their families by the police in the
name of investigation about some crime. While dealing with this issue, the
Board has taken cognizance of the said fact and also issued guidelines for police
while dealing with children, approaching their families, visiting their homes and
the locality where they live.

An instance enunciating the above transgressions: a police man, in police

uniform visited the home of a delinquent juvenile and asked for his
whereabouts. The police tried to enter the house of the delinquent juvenile and
by chance the father of the delinquent juvenile, who is more often out of his
house because of his job, was at home. The police was intimated about the fact
that the delinquent juvenile was not at home. The police argued with the father
and said there has been a crime in the area and he has to question the delinquent
juvenile in this regard. The parents fear that the police have already started
treating their child as a 'known offender' and if the child is taken in police
custody he may be wrongly implicated as done earlier. The act of the police
entering the house of the delinquent juvenile without any prima facie grounds
effects the reputation of the family in the locality adversely.

The delinquent juvenile alleged that he was called to the police station and was
left after the enquiry. It is not clear why he was called in the police station. The
delinquent juvenile also alleged that the police wanted him to tell the
whereabouts of one of his associates who is accused in another case. If the
delinquent juvenile was called for inquiry as a witness it was required for the
police to have given him a notice under section 160 of Code of Criminal
Procedure, 19739; apparently no such notice was given to the delinquent
juvenile.

Even after the delinquent juvenile is apprehended and sent to the observation
home, the police do not stop their unlawful activities. They visit the house of
delinquent juveniles to enquire about them. This is being done despite the
specific and repeated direction of the Board to the police to spare the delinquent
juvenile, who intends to settle down and is in process of rehabilitation.

No child would be happy to lead an institution based life, but generally the
children prefer to stay in the institution as they fear that once they go back
home, the police will again harass them and implicate them in false cases or will
try to use them for extracting information whenever a crime takes place in the
area. In such cases, the children feel threatened and afraid of police and prefer
staying in observation home – where they find themselves in a safe environment
and out of reach of police.

Principle XIV of The Juvenile Justice Rules: Principle of Fresh

Start

(a) The principle of fresh start promotes new beginning for the child or
juvenile in conflict with law by ensuring erasure of his past records.

The rule when it says removal of past records of the delinquent juvenile, does
not mean such removal from the documents only. It intends the removal of these
facts from the memories of all the persons involved, unless it needs to be looked
into for the better interest of the delinquent juvenile. A delinquent juvenile will
never be able to make a fresh start if the police keep visiting him/ her and intend
to use him/ her as an informer merely because they suspect the involvement of
the delinquent juvenile in the offence because of his/ her previous record.

9
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, No. 2, Acts of Parliament, 1974 (India).
Section 8410 of the Delhi Juvenile Justice Rules says that the police official
guilty of torturing a child shall be liable to be removed from service.

Section 84: (11) Any police officer found guilty, after due
enquiry, of torturing a child mentally or physically, shall be
liable to be removed from service, besides being prosecuted
for the offence.

In many cases, police have been found to have caused mental torture to the
child to the extent that the delinquent juveniles prefer to stay in the observation
homes and do not want to come out as they fear a similar torture in future.

JUDICIAL INTERVENTION

Guidelines for Police Officers of the Special Juvenile Police Unit have been
issued by the Delhi High Court11 for the police officers. Certain key guidelines
have been reiterated below:

(i) As soon as a child is reported to be in a situation of conflict with law and

is apprehended by the police, the concerned police officer shall inform the
designated Child Welfare Officer, parents or guardian of the alleged
delinquent juvenile, concerned probation officer.

(ii) A police officer dealing with a child in conflict with law should always be
in plain clothes.

(iii) A child in conflict with law should be apprehended only when there is
alleged involvement of the child in a serious offence (offences entailing
punishment of 7 years and more; e.g. offences such as rape, murder etc.)

10
Section 84, The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007, No. 33, Acts of Parliament,
2006 (India).
11
Justice Madan B. Lokur, Justice Anil Kumar, Justice Rekha Sharma, Guidelines for Police Officers of the
Special Juvenile Police Unit, 11-16 (2009).
(iv) In other cases involving non-serious offences, the police officer is not
required to register an First Information Report (FIR) or apprehend the
child, unless such apprehension is in the interest of the child. Such
information relating to the alleged commission of a non-serious offence
should be recorded in the general diary and specific reasons for not
registering an FIR should follow.

(v) In case the child is released on bail, the Child Welfare Officer should
arrange counselling sessions for the child as well as parents/guardian. If
the child is apprehended, he should be produced before the Board within
24 hours (excluding the time taken for journey).

(vi) The child should be informed directly and promptly of the charges against
him and appropriate assistance like medical aid, legal aid, assistance of
the interpreter (if required) should be given to the child.

(vii) Every child has a right of family protection. As soon as he is

apprehended, efforts should be made to contact his biological parents/
guardians. Moreover, the Child Welfare Officer should make efforts to
collect the age proof of such child which should be produced before the
Juvenile Justice Board at the time of first production of the child before
the Board.

(viii) The child is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty by law and,
therefore, should not be compelled to confess his guilt. Moreover, as far
as possible, the child should be interviewed/ interrogated at such a place
which does not give him the feel of a police station.

(ix) The child under no circumstances is to be handcuffed or put under fetters.

Certain resolutions were passed in the Chief Justices’ Conference on 23 rd April

2016 by Justice T.S. Thakur (CJI), J. Anil R. Dave, J. Jagdish Singh Khehar, J.
D.H. Waghela, J. A.M. Khanwilkar, J. D.Y. Chandrachud for the strengthening
of the Juvenile Justice System:

The Conference noted the necessity for ensuring institutional support for
juveniles in conflict of law and children in need of care and protection and
resolved that:

(i) Cases pending for a period in excess of one year be disposed of on

priority by the Juvenile Justice Boards

(ii) Juvenile Justice Committees of the High Courts shall monitor the
pendency and disposal of adoption cases and applications for
declaring children free for adoption on a priority basis

(iii) Steps be taken to ensure that every district is equipped with a Child
Protection Unit. Special Juvenile Protection Unit, Observation
Homes and Children Homes

(iv) Pending cases of orphaned, abandoned and surrendered children be

monitored by the Juvenile Justice Committees of High Courts.

(v) Training and refresher training be imparted to judicial officers

(vi) Vacancies in Juvenile Justice institutions be filled up on a mission

mode basis in three months

(vii) State Legal Services Authorities should actively discharge their

role

CONCLUSION

The Indian government has made its best efforts to safeguard the interest of the
children in conflict with law. The Indian courts have also played an active role
in promoting efficacious implementation of the Act. They have formulated
guidelines and resolutions for protecting the rights of delinquent juveniles. The
safeguards are well established but lack implementation. They are laid down
neatly on the papers. What needs to be done now is to bring these to life. The
police officials (who are the first point of contact of the legal system to the
delinquent juveniles) should be made aware about these safeguards. They
should be sensitised towards this issue and special training should be given to
ensure that they are aware of the need to have a different approach while
dealing with children in conflict with law than when dealing with adult
offenders. It is high time that these issues should be taken into account and
made a priority .