How India’s integrated juvenile justice system has strengthened over time

After its implementation, JJA created facilities, structures, and systems that addressed children’s needs in the protection system.

The law for child rights in India has evolved to strengthen and ensure the safety and well-being of children. For example, the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act (JJA), 2015, was enacted to remove the ambiguities in its predecessor (2000) and introduce reformative, welfare-oriented and more stringent safeguards for children. After its implementation, JJA created facilities, structures, and systems that addressed children’s needs in the protection system.

There are critics who interpret the provisions of the amendments in silos, instead of seeing the juvenile justice system as an integral part of a larger canvas of the criminal justice system. (HT Photo)

The amendments to JJA, which were passed in 2021, have brought more clarity in the laws for the protection of child rights. The amendments reflect due consideration given by the government to issues that impact society and its correlation with some of the core provisions amended under JJA, which would otherwise have created unnecessary issues within the families, schools, and among custodians. The other reason behind these amendments is the growing evidence of cases involving couples in marital dispute, dragging their children into these fights, invoking provisions against a spouse for vindictive reasons, fraudulent First Information Reports (FIRs) against teachers, custodians of incapacitated parents, and overlapping or doubling of provisions with other laws.

Over the course of time, the juvenile justice system is becoming more integrated and dynamic, with various other laws playing their part to crack down on criminal offences committed against children. Redefining the role of district magistrates (DMs) in JJA implementation could lead to the participation of officers at the district-level in implementing the Act. Further, more responsibility to the district administration will make the process of review and accountability of the protection easier and more efficient.

While JJA is a special enactment for the care and protection of children, this Act’s provisions cannot be seen in isolation. The Act’s provisions have to be read with other relevant provisions of criminal law and the child protection system.

For instance, where Section 81 of JJA provides for rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to five years for selling or buying any child, Section 370 of the Indian Penal Code states that in the case of trafficking of a minor, the punishment shall be rigorous imprisonment of not less than 10 years.

There are critics who interpret the provisions of the amendments in silos, instead of seeing the juvenile justice system as an integral part of a larger canvas of the criminal justice system and other special laws related to children. They fail to understand the grounds for such amendments. Embedding child protection legislation in the criminal justice system is a sensitive area that needs effective interpretation on the ground. Sweeping remarks on such sensitive issues are detrimental to the welfare and protection of children.

The amendments in JJA have brought more clarity and a better understanding of the classification of offences while dealing with crimes against children. That is to say, offences where the punishment is imprisonment for more than seven years are cognisable and non-bailable, offences where the punishment is imprisonment for between three and seven years are non-cognisable and non-bailable and petty offences, where the punishment is imprisonment for less than three years or only a fine, are non-cognisable and available.

All such offences under this Act, after the 2021 amendment, have to be tried by a children’s court. This amendment, when understood correctly, makes it clear that while an offence may be non-cognisable, the person committing the crime will not get bail easily as the offence is non-bailable. The creation of a special jurisdiction for trial offences under the Act by a children’s court simplifies the ambiguities regarding trial of offences and provides for trial by a special court of law meant for crimes committed against children.

Swarupama Chaturvedi is advocate-on-record, Supreme Court of India, and formerly assistant professor, NLSIU, Bangalore 

The views expressed are personal