juvinile justice

Juvenile Justice Implication and Practicality

TERM PAPER for B.A.LLB (Hons) SEM-4

Juvenile Justice Implication and Practicality

TERM PAPER for B.A.LLB (Hons) SEM-4

Made by Akshi Tandon

SUBMITED TO AMITY LAW SCHOOL AMITY UNIVERSITY LUCKNOW UTTAR PRADESH

2

Made by Akshi Tandon

SUBMITED TO AMITY LAW SCHOOL AMITY UNIVERSITY LUCKNOW UTTAR PRADESH

JUVINILE

JUSTICE 3

CERTIFICATE THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE TERM PAPER ENTITLED JUVINILE JUSTICE IMPLICATION AND PRATICALITY SUBMITTED BY (AKSHI TANDON) IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR AWARD OF DEGREE BALLB(HONS) TO AMITY LAW SCHOOL AMITY UNIVERSITY UTTAR PRADESH LUCKNOW IS A RECORD OF THE CANDIDATE’S ORKWN WORK CARRIED OUT BY HER UNDER MY SUPERVISION. THE MATTER EMBODIED IN THIS TERM PAPER IS ORIGINAL AND NOT BEEN SUMITTED FOR THE AWARD OF ANY OTHER DEGREE

(MR.GAURAV KAUSHIK) SUPRIVISOR 4

DATE:

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I WOULD LIKE TO THANK MY SUPERVISOR WHO HELPED ME LOT DURING MY PREPARATION OF MY TERM PAPER. IAM EXTREMLY THANKFUL TO MY CLSSMATE S AS THEY HELPED ME A LOT IN THE COLLECTION OF DATA REQUIRED FOR TERM PAPER. CAN’T FORGET THE KIND SUPPORT OF THE LIBRARIAN OF MY UNIVERSITY’S LIBRARY AS HE HELPED ME A LOT IN PROVIDING NEW BOOKS AND LOT OF OTHER THINGS,WHICH WAS CRUCIAL REQUIREMENT FOR THE PREPARATION OF MY TERM PAPER

AKSHI TANDON

5

INDEX

PAGE

CHAPTER1

Pg6

CHAPTER2

Pg24

CHAPTER3

Pg34

CHAPTER4

Pg39

CHAPTER5

Pg47

CHAPTER6

Pg51

CHAPTER7

Pg63

6

Chapter-1

JUVENILE JUSTICE & EVOLUTION

7

JUVENILE JUSTICE Every child needs nurturing, education and exercise. These needs don’t end when children come in contact with the law. For the vast majority of children and young people, however, their well being and even their lives are jeopardized if they are so much as suspected of a crime. No delinquent has a gene or a set of genes, which produce in him/he a tendency to indulge in anti-social behaviour. When children come into conflict with the law, it’s most often for minor, non-violent offenses — usually theft. In some cases their only “crime” is that they are poor, homeless or disadvantaged. Children forced to live on the streets are particularly vulnerable to arbitrary arrest and ill-treatment. Many survive on begging, petty crime or other illegal activities, which bring them regularly to the attention of the police. Some are detained and ill-treated simply because they are easy prey. Others are arrested under laws, which make homelessness and begging criminal offences. Studies had shown that, change in lifestyle, incompetent parenting and the sense of insecurity arising out of living in slum-like situations could lead children to offences. It 8

has been noted that instances of juveniles being involved in crime is on the rise in the State of Kerala. Juvenile crime has specific causes and so Juvenile delinquency is to be handled very delicately. Over the years, for the proper care, protection and treatment of children below 18 years and to protect the full range of rights such as the right to education, highest standard of health and well-being, protection from abuse and exploitation, among others a series of correctional settings had been set up by Government in Kerala. Juvenile Homes, Observation Home, Balasadanam, Special Homes, etc were few among them which accommodate more than 600 children. Apart from this, Child Welfare Committee and Juvenile Justice Board had been constituted in each district for rendering justice and welfare to children who are in conflict with the law. A significant development in dealing with juvenile delinquency in the State is that a better social awareness has come into place, thereby improving the chance of reformation for those who have slipped to criminal activities by ignorance.

Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2000 The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2000 is designed for the care, protection, development and rehabilitation of juvenile in conflict with law and child in need of care and protection, as well as the adjudication and disposition of certain matters related to them. This Act was enacted by Parliament to replace the J.J. Act 1986. It provides a uniform legal framework of justice across the country, so as to ensure that no child under any circumstances is lodged in jail or police lock-up. The Act covers children up to 18 years. The Act spells out the machinery and infrastructure required for the care, protection, development and rehabilitation of children. Such machinery includes Juvenile Justice Boards for the screening of juvenile in conflict with law and Child Welfare Committees for the care and protection and treatment of child in need of care and protection. Mention is also made of the need for development of appropriate linkages between the formal system and voluntary agencies to assist in implementing a diverse approach towards the recover, re-education and rehabilitation of juveniles. The Act enables the competent authority a wide range of disposition alternatives with preference to family/community based placements.

9

It is generally considered a progressive law in accordance with international principles, such as the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the child, to which India Government became a signatory in 1992. In signing the Convention, the Government accepted obligations to bring all state laws and policies in the line with the main principles of children’s rights, namely best interest, non-discrimination and child’s voice. Further more, in relation to the Administration of Juvenile Justice system, Article 40 of the Child Rights Convention States. “State Parties recognize the right of every child alleged as accused of or recognized as having infringed the penal law to be treated in a manner consistent with the promotion of the child’s sense of dignity and worth, which reinforces the child’s respect for the human rights and fundamental freedoms of others and which takes into account, the child’s age and the desirability to promoting the child’s reintegration and the child’s assuming a constructive role in society”. Despite the good intentions of the Act, there is widespread agreement that there are considerable failings in the existing system.

The Juvenile Justice System

and the effect of the changes brought about by the Amendment in 2006 in relation to Children in Conflict with the Law

There is no trust more sacred than the one the world holds with children. There is no duty more important than ensuring that their rights are respected, that their welfare is protected, that their lives are free from fear and want and that they grow up in peace . Kofi Annan.

Need for a law to apply to juveniles and the ideal scope and objectives of such a law.

10

Children make up a quarter of India’s sixteen percent share in the global population. In other words, Indian children make up four percent of the world’s population. .

Despite the presence of constitutional guarantees to equal opportunities and a plethora of child-centric legislation and civil rights, millions of Indian children – and especially those judged as being in conflict with the law – face widespread discrimination and deprivation. One of the many problems with the current state of affairs is the State’s decision to adopt a welfare-based – rather than a rights-based - approach towards the rehabilitation of these children. At the heart of this problem is the functioning of the judiciary at the grassroots level. Here, lower courts construe the relevant laws in such a way as to over look the concept of rights altogether and treat juvenile delinquents as adult offenders. Additionally, the whole concept of protective rather than penal provisions of the Juvenile Justice System (JJS) is ignored in toto, especially with relation to the children in conflict with the law.

Constitutional guarantees and rights recognized under the CRC.

Development of the JJS has come a long way, from the seeds of a rights based approach being found in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) of 1966 to its final culmination in the Convention on the Rights of a Child (CRC). The ICCPR lays down specific provisions in the context of juvenile justice, these being Article 10(2) , which provides for the separation of juvenile offenders from adults for their speedy adjudication. Further still, Article 14 (4) categorically provided that the trial procedures for juveniles should take into account the age of juveniles and the desirability for their rehabilitation. These provisos could be considered as the platform or the stepping-stone for the development of certain necessary rights with regards to juvenile offenders. But despite their importance and usefulness the provisions as laid out were narrow and limited, and failed to provide wide spread protection to juvenile offenders. With the passage of time and with States developing separate juvenile justice systems, the need to have a complete framework at the international level became apparent.

Beijing Rules In 1980 the Sixth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and Treatment of Offenders called for the preparation of minimum rules regarding the administration of juvenile justice . Following which in 1985 the General Assembly adopted the United Nations Standard Minimum rules for the Administration of Juvenile justice also known as the Beijing Rules . The Beijing rules provided States with a constructive and definitive framework within which they could create and model their own juvenile justice systems. Even though the Beijing rules were not a set of treaty rules

11

they still found a binding force after their eventual incorporation in the CRC. Despite its ground-breaking approach, the biggest deficiency in the Beijing Rules was its ambiguity with regards to who is or can be considered as a juvenile under Rule 2(2) (a) . The gaping hole in the definition allowed national legal systems to define juveniles. In essence the Beijing rules said no more than that if a person is treated as a juvenile he or she is a juvenile. Even though the Beijing rules were widely adopted in the legal system of many states the definition of juvenile severely limited and hampered the application of the rules However with the passage of time and with the incorporation of the CRC most of the rules as enshrined under the Beijing Rules became binding laws

Convention on the Rights of the Child 1989

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child 1989 which came into force on September 3rd 1990 can be considered as the highest point in the quest for ensuring right to juveniles without at any point undermining the welfare principles of the JJS. The Convention not only recognized the rights which were to be processed according to the principles of justice, but also the rights to participation, name, nationality, identity, survival, development, adoption and the right against exploitation. The basic principles underlying the CRC are as follows 1. Primary stress was laid on the best interests of the child in all actions undertaken by public or private social welfare institutions, courts of law administrative authorities or legislative bodies 2. The children’s opinions to be given careful consideration in all matters affecting them 3. Efforts to be made to ensure family care to the child 4. Children to enjoy the rights as specified in the CRC without discrimination 5. State parties to respect the rights of a child and to ensure realization of their rights by taking measures to the maximum extent of their available resources with regard to economic social and cultural rights 6. State parties through appropriate and active means make the principles and provisions widely known to adults and children alike

As seen above the most important concept to have developed with the incorporation of the CRC was the concept of best interests of the child. The same was strengthened and upheld in regards to juvenile justice by the following provisions-

1. The well being of a child in the administration of justice needs to be upheld 2. Criminal responsibility should be related to age at which the children are able to understand the consequences of their actions as enshrined in Article 40 (3) (b) of the CRC and Rule 4 of the Beijing Rules 3. Diverting children from formal trial procedures as enshrined in Article 40 (3) (b) of the CRC and 11.1 of the Beijing Rules 4. Speedy adjudication should

12

be of utmost importance as mentioned in Article 10 (2)(b) of the ICCPR 5. The arrest, detention or imprisonment should only be imposed on children as a measure of last resort Riyadh Guidelines

The United Nations further adopted the rules for the Protection of Juveniles deprived of their Liberty in 1990 . The fundamental perspective of these rules were that the JJS should uphold the rights and safety and promote the physical and mental well being of juveniles while incorporating the principles of the Beijing Rules

This was immediately followed by the incorporation of the United Nations guidelines for the prevention of Juvenile delinquency also known as the Riyadh Guidelines These guidelines focus on early protection and preventive intervention paying particular attention in situations of social risk. Most importantly, Rule 7 of the Riyadh Guidelines provides that provisions are to be interpreted and implemented within the broad framework of the Universal Declaration for Human Rights, the International Covenant for Economic Social and Cultural Rights, the CRC and in the context of the Beijing Rules as well as other instruments and norms relating to the rights, interests and well-being of all children and young persons . The primary underlying principle of the Riyadh guidelines is the recognition of the need for and importance of progressive delinquency prevention policies. Further still, these guidelines aim to help socialize and integrate children to the family and to the active involvement and support of the community. The guidelines also recommend that children should use schools as resources and referral centers for the provision of counseling, particularly for children with special needs and for dissemination of information on the prevention of drugs, alcohol and substance abuse . These new international ethos in the juvenile justice system should be considered to have developed a paradigm shift towards a more progressively developed right based approach.

The Evolution of the Law in India – 1773- 2000

The history of juvenile justice in India can be traced back to the early 18th century, where references to children and the laws and rules governing them can be found in the texts of the ancient Hindu scripts

Prior to 1773 Prior to 1773, like other countries the concept of juvenile justice in India was far from developed, it was the parents and family who were responsible for the

13

maintenance and supervision of children. Children’s actions, both criminal and non criminal, were governed by the existing Hindu and Muslim laws wherein it was the primary responsibility of the families to monitor their children’s actions. Although these laws had no specific reference to juvenile delinquents, the Hindu law of Manusmriti referred to certain offences some of them included the examples of a child, littering on a public street was not held liable for the actions so ensued, but as a punishment was required to clean the litter whereas, adults on the other hand, had to pay a fine and clean the trash. Similarly under Muslim law, a young boy was not punished for having sex with consenting adult woman. These provisions show the adoption of lesser culpability for children’s actions and the same very simple in their approach.

1773–1850 The East India Company dominated India, during the period between 1773 and 1850. This started as a trading company and later developed into a governing body. But in 1773, the destruction of the company seemed imminent, resulting in the British taking greater parliamentary control over the Company and placing India under the rule of a Governor-General. During this period, the reform movement emerging in England also influenced India. Colonial exploitation resulted in migration of indigenous rural population into urban slums and an increased number of destitute and delinquent children. Concerned for the plight of children, Indians approached Lord Cornwallis, then Governor-General of India, to establish a center for destitute children in Calcutta, a major trading city. As a result, the first orphanage, “Ragged School,” was established in 1843. The Ragged Schools (special name given to orphanages) were charitable schools, dedicated to providing free education of destitute children.

1850 - 1919 The period between 1850 and 1919 was a time where the country was faced by a rapid social change, industrialization and increasing populations. These changes brought about a new class of delinquent, neglected, and dependent children needing formal intervention. Thus the need for new legislations dealing with children was felt. Some of the most important laws passed between 1850 and 1919 were the Apprentice Act (1850), the Indian Penal Code (1860), the Code of Criminal Procedure (1861), and the Reformatory Act (1876 and 1897). The Apprentice Act (1850) dealt with young people between the ages of 10 and 18 who were either destitute or petty offenders. Children who were convicted were made to serve out their sentences as apprentices for businessmen. Section 82 of the Indian Penal Code of 1860 also recognized the special status of children. It set age limits on criminal responsibility and excluded children younger than 7 from culpability. Moreover, children between 7 and 12 years old could be considered to have sufficient maturity to understand the nature of their actions under certain circumstances. The Code of Criminal Procedure of 1861 allowed for separate trials of persons younger than age 15 as well as their confinement in reformatories rather than prisons. The Act further provided mechanisms for placement on probation . It was result of these enactments that penal philosophy in India towards juveniles could be seen to changing from that of penal to reformation . The concept of a reformatory school for

14

delinquent children came to fruition with the passage of the Reformatory Schools Act of 1876. This policy of separate treatment of juveniles was further bolstered by the Reformatory School Act of 1897, which dealt solely with the treatment and rehabilitation of the young offenders. It allowed boys younger than the age of 15 to be placed in reformatory until 18 years of age. Boys younger than 14 were released on license, only on the grounds that they could obtain subsequent employment. It should be noted that these reforms applied only to male delinquents/destitute and young girls were excluded.

1919–1950 From 1919 and 1950 two major changes occurred in India’s juvenile justice policy as the country slowly moved toward independence. First, an internal move to establish a special children’s act came from the Indian Jail Committee (1919–1920). This committee recommended to the British government to establish a separate court for children as well as separate institutions for children. As the country was still under British rule, it could not enact central legislation for the entire country. However, individual provincial governments could choose to enact their own legislation, which prompted the second major effort wherein provincial governments did just that, and enacted separate legislation for juveniles in their respective jurisdictions. The first province to enact its own piece of juvenile legislation was Madras. The Madras Children Act (1920) made provision for the custody, trial, and punishment of youthful offenders and for the protection of children and young persons. The law created three categories of children: “child” (anyone younger than 14), “young person” (anyone between the ages of 14 and 18), and “youthful offender” (anyone younger than 18 guilty of an offence). During this time, the provinces of Bengal and Bombay also passed their own children acts in 1922 and 1924, respectively. Apart from these three provinces, other jurisdictions either neglected to create a separate legislation for juveniles, or failed to fully enforce their respective acts . After India gained its independence in 1947, the central government drafted the Country’s Constitution in 1949. The Constitution contained certain specific rights that could be applied to children the same being Articles 15(3), 23, 39(e) and (f), and 45 of the Indian Constitution.

Post 1950 The years following 1950 witnessed both official and non-governmental initiatives that contributed to the development of a more pronounced juvenile justice system in India. To address the increase in neglected and delinquent children as a result of partition of the country into Pakistan and India, the Indian government passed a Central Children’s Act (CCA in 1960. The CCA provided for the care, protection, and treatment of juveniles, and made it applicable in the territories under direct central government rule. The central government, however, did not make any effort to apply the law throughout the entire country. As a result, states with existing laws were free to enforce their own laws, and other states failed to pass any laws regarding the special treatment of children. Further still in 1974, India declared its National Policy for Children, “recognizing children as a nation’s supremely important asset and that their programs must find a prominent place in the national plan for the development of human

15

resources”. The policy included, among other things, training and rehabilitation of delinquent, destitute, neglected, and exploited children.

By 1986, almost all states had passed their own children’s legislation. Because these acts lacked consistency in terms of defining delinquency, court procedures, and institutionalization practices, the Indian government felt a need for a children’s justice act that could be applied throughout the country. With that in mind, the central government passed the most comprehensive act to date, the Juvenile Justice Act of 1986. (JJA) The JJA was considered a unique piece of social legislation intended to provide care, protection, treatment, development, and rehabilitation for neglected and delinquent juveniles as well as the adjudication of matters relating to the disposition of delinquent juveniles. To accomplish the goals of this legislation, special provisions were made for separate procedures for handling offenders and non offenders. Juvenile courts were created to deal with juvenile delinquents, and juvenile welfare boards were established to handle neglected juveniles. The final decision regarding the implementation of these courts and boards was left to the respective state governments, but with some stipulations.

The years subsequent to the passing of the JJA were met with much discontent in the field of juvenile justice. The JJA despite being landmark legislation in the field of juvenile justice failed at various levels to fulfill the aims and goals of ensuring that juvenile delinquents needed special care and protection and had to be viewed in a different light.

Following which a number of national consultations were held concerning juvenile justice administration during 1999- 2000 to improve the existing unsatisfactory state of affairs. Three lines of thought emerged as to how to deal with the problem, some suggested that the law provided a satisfactory framework but needed proper implementation. It was possible to strategize within the law and use spaces and gaps to enforce the true spirit of the law. The second position was that the law, by its very design was inadequate. Amendments were needed to incorporate a uniform age for boys and girls as well as other measures like adoption foster care and non institutional measures along with the increased participation of the community. The third position was in favor of scrapping the present law and having a new one its place. A further divide within this approach was firstly to have a comprehensive code for children and have two laws, i.e. one to deal with neglected children and the other for delinquent children. It was within this background that a committee was appointed under the chairmanship of Justice Krishna to prepare a children code. This committee prepared the Code Bill 2000 and presented it to the then Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee on 14th November 2000. He assured that the same would be a valuable input. Following which the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act was enacted .

16

The present day Administration of Juvenile Justice in India

The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) JJ(C&P) Act was enacted to consolidate and amend the law relating to juveniles in conflict with law and children in need of care and protection, by providing for proper care, protection and treatment by catering to their development needs, and by adopting 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 this enactment.

The Juvenile Justice Act 1986 was repealed by this Act. Any action taken under the former Act would be deemed to have been taken under corresponding provisions of this new Act .

First of all, the Act defines the ‘juvenile’ or ‘child’ as a person who has not completed 18 years of age . ‘Juvenile in conflict with law’ means a juvenile who is alleged to have committed an offence . An important change brought about by the Act was to replace the existing Juvenile Welfare Board with the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) .

Specific principles of juvenile justice that have been overlooked in the JJ(C&P),

Despite the changes brought about the JJ (C&P) there are certain specific principles as envisaged under the (CRC) and the Constitution of India These include:

1. Firstly and most importantly, the JJ (C&P) has over looked certain crucial legal issues that have been raised for interpretation time and again before the Supreme Court and the High Courts. These questions were not clarified by the preceding JJA and the same has not been done in the current Act and can be enunciated as follows-

• The relevant date for the application of the Act. The Act in no way has categorically mentioned whether the act is to apply to a juvenile from the day of the commission of the

17

alleged offence or from the date the juvenile is produced before the magistrate. • Whose responsibility is it to prove that the accused is a child? • The relationship between JJ(C&P) and other legislations containing an overriding clause. By doing so, the JJ(C&P) had created lacunae where such important issues are left to the vagaries of judicial interpretation, which in a country like India can prove to be very detrimental in the long run as the free rein of judicial interpretation can in most cases lead to rights being flouted rather than being upheld. Further the JJ(C&P) has potential for severe penalization of children. The exclusion of imprisonment from section 16(1) is most subtle and has been attained ironically by the addition of the word ‘life’. It is important to note that there was no policy change proposed in the Parliament at the time of the passing of the Bill, but yet by introducing the word life before imprisonment it has made possible through judicial construction of the same to impose imprisonment on children. This change has so far gone unnoticed and could be a result of an over zealous drafting procedure aimed at excluding all punishments for children. The failure to exclude imprisonment with the exception of life imprisonment from this section is in complete contradiction with the rest of the legislation and the commitment India has made by signing various international instruments. Judges and others, like the judge who imposed life imprisonment Chanchu despite the ban under the JJA, will pounce on this change and gleefully send children committing serious offences to prison. This is contrary to the commitment of providing for proper care, protection, and treatment by catering to the children’s developmental needs and adopting a child friendly approach in the adjudication and disposition of matters in the best interest of children. 2. The police remain the primary agency for bringing children specially those in conflict with the law within the purview of the act. The provision enabling constitution of the board and the committee for a group of districts coupled with the various omissions such as production of children before a magistrate within 24 hours, prohibition against keeping them in police stations and presence of a lawyer leave the children under complete control of police. There is no obligation per se to produce a child before the board or the committee. The problem is further compounded as the act provides that children not released on bail by the police officer maybe kept only in an observation home. An observation home, too, maybe established for a district or a group of districts. It can be pointed out that in the state of Maharashtra (Marathwada Region) there is only one observation home for girls. What this entails is that more children (girls in this particular case) will remain in police stations or be sent to an observation home which in most likelihood will be far away from their place of residence. 3. The JJ (C&P) fails to provide for procedural guarantees like rights to counsel and speedy trial. 4. Surprisingly there is no linkage between the JJ (C&P) and the other related legal provisions for children, such as child labour, primary education, sexual abuse, disabilities and health.

18

5. Section 16 of the JJ (C&P) provides for segregation of a juvenile who has attained the age of 16 years and has committed a serious crime from other juveniles within the same observation home. This provision in all aspects not only defeats the best interest principle but is also a violation of the right to development of the child. 6. Punishment for cruelty towards a juvenile or child or exploitation of juvenile employed as provided in Sections 23-26 is imprisonment for a term up to 6 months or fine or both. This being a serious offence, the punishment as prescribed under this section should be enhanced and a provision for compensation of the victim should be provided. 7. Section 8 of the JJ (C&P) provides for a time limit within which the preliminary inquiries are completed (four months). However in reality and as observed by a large number of NGO’s this is rarely done which entails that a large number of children remain in observation homes for a period amounting to more than 4 months 8. The Observation homes set up under this JJ (C&P) are temporary reception centres for children awaiting inquiry, bail or trial, thus no provisions for education are provided. This being the case a large number of children who are confined for long periods are denied their inherent constitutional right to education. 9. Finally many states have still not complied with the provisions of the 2000 JJ (C&P), One of the many examples in this regard is the case where a Juvenile Justice Board in the state of Punjab was only set up on the 15th of September 2006, i.e. 6 years after the JJ (C&P) came into force .

The Road to Redemption

In the wake of the above mentioned lacunae and drawbacks the Ministry of Law and Justice finally passed the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) of Children Amendment Act 2006 , which has taken a step forward towards filling the gaps in the JJS as pointed out in the preceding paragraphs

The first change brought forth by this act was change in the definition of a juvenile in conflict with the law, which now reads “a juvenile in conflict with the law” means a juvenile who is alleged to have committed an offense and has not completed his/her 18th year of age as on the date of commission of such offence” . The inclusion of the vital point regarding the date of commission of the offense thus lays to rest the point of the date of the application of the act as was brought forth time and again before the Supreme

19

Court, especially in the cases of Umesh Chandra and Arnit Das . This change is further strengthened by the inclusion of section 7A.

"7A. (J) Whenever a claim of juvenility is raised before any court or a court is of the opinion that an accused person was a juvenile on the date of commission of the offence; the court shall make an inquiry, take such evidence as may be necessary (but not an affidavit) so as to determine the age of such person, and shall record a finding whether the person is a juvenile or a child or not, stating his age as nearly as may be: Provided that a claim of juvenility may be raised before any court and it shall be recognised at any stage, even after final disposal of the case, and such claim shall be determined in terms of the provisions contained in this Act and the rules made thereunder, even if the juvenile has ceased to be so on or before the date of commencement of this Act. (2) If the court finds a person to be a juvenile on the date of commission of the offence under sub-section (1), it shall forward the juvenile to the Board for passing appropriate order, and the sentence if any, passed by a court shall be deemed to have no effect. " .

The interpretations by the Supreme Court and the Higher Courts in this regard had not been uniform and at most times had completely overlooked the broader contextual goals of best interests of the child as enshrined in the various child-centric acts, the CRC and the foundational concept of parens patriae of the JJS. The root of this problem till the above mentioned amendments lay in the lack of clarity on the consequences if the accused failed to raise the plea of being a child at the earliest given opportunity under the Acts.

The plea of child status has usually been allowed by a number of higher courts at various stages of initiation of proceedings; however there has been a serious lack of uniform practice or approach. In Krishna Bhagwan v State of Bihar no plea was recorded that the accused was a child at the time of the commission of the offence. Had the said plea been recorded, the case under no circumstances could have been tried by the Sessions Court . The plea of age was thus taken up by the High Court.

The two questions discussed in detail before High Court were: 1. First, whether the CA would be applicable if the convict was a child (a boy below the age of sixteen years) at the time of the offence but had crossed the age at the time of the sentence.

20

2. Second, whether the plea of age can be taken at the time of the appeal and what procedure should be adopted to determine the age of the convict at the time of the offence. Answering the first question the court quoted Sections 3 and 56 of the JJA and stated that even if a child accused has crossed over into adulthood, the inquiry maybe continued and orders be made as if the accused had continued to be a juvenile. The court while construing the same looked at the legislative intent about the possibility that while undergoing a trial, the accused might cease to be a juvenile. The court introduced a ‘deeming fiction’, which requires it to treat the accused as a child. In regards to the second question the High Court held that it could be done at the appellate stage, in case of children, but the court should be alert to the misuse of such a plea when a convict is sentenced.

However in the case of Sushil Kumar as the plea of child status was not raised before the Trial Court or the High Court or even in the original grounds of the Special Leave Petition but was added afterwards, the Supreme Court believed the plea to be an afterthought and dismissed the petition.

The Supreme Court took a different approach in the case of Gopinath Ghosh where the accused had given his age as much above the cut off age for a child. However in this case, the court not only allowed the plea of child status to be raised but also referred the matter to the Sessions Court for determination of the age of the accused.

In most cases presented before the Higher Courts, the beneficial provisions of the Acts were not applied at earlier stages because the parties concerned i.e. the child himself, the lawyer, the State counsel or the Magistrate did not raise the plea of child status. As these cases illustrate, the Supreme Court has taken contrary approaches in regards to the same.

The majority of children falling within the purview of the JJS are poor and illiterate and unaware of their rights as enshrined under the various acts. It would not be fair to expect them to be aware of the laws that exist for their benefit. Keeping this in mind it is only pertinent to say that a flexible approach should be taken by the courts in regards to recording of pleas of child status so as to uphold the underlying principle of best interests of the child. Evidence of Age and Determination of the Child

The issue of determination of the age of the child accused has on a number of occasions been deliberated by the came Higher Courts. Determination of the age of a child under

21

the JJA is essential for two specific reasons. Firstly such age determination is of paramount importance to find out whether or not the person so accused falls under the purview of the JJA and secondly, recording of the same as nearly and accurately as possible is essential for deciding the duration of institutionalization. Age determination is however not an easy task especially in borderline cases, the reasons being, children usually do not have any documentary evidence and medical examinations. This leaves a margin of around 6 months if an ossification test of multiple joints is conducted

Different High Courts had adopted a varied range of ways to determine the age of the accused. In Shyam Narian Singh V State of Bihar , the Patna High Court determined the accused to be a juvenile on the basis of the age mentioned in his own evidence before the Magistrate as the same was not challenged by anyone.

However in the case of Gopal Chand Srivastav v State of U.P. the Judge at hand refused to rely on the evidence as adduced by the accused, as the accused appeared (to the residing judge) to be over 18 years. Though this form of decision-making was disapproved by the Delhi high Court in the case of Manoj @ Munna v State where the court held that the rejection of the accused’s application claiming to be a child on the basis of mere visual examination was improper.

It has to be kept in mind that a majority of children brought within the purview of the JJS usually do not have any documentary evidence of their age. In numerous cases where age determination had to proceed through documents adduced, major impediments were created by the discrepancy between the documents presented. The decisions were made on the basis of that document which was likely to be more reliable or authoritative. For example in the case of Anita V Atal Bihari and Another the entry of the date of birth in the record of registration of births and deaths maintained in accordance with the provisions of the Act of 1969 is admissible as evidence under Section 35 of the Evidence Act and found to be conclusive. Further still, in the case of Daljit Singh v State of Punjab the High School certificate was held to be good evidence though not conclusive. However in the case of Irfan v State of U.P the accused was determined to be a child only when the entry in the school leaving certificate was supported by medical evidence.

It is important to draw attention to the case of Kumar Satyanand v State of Bihar where the High court of Patna gave preference to documentary evidence over the medical evidence deducing that where documents like matriculation certificate, school leaving certificate or entries made in the different records of schools are available they should be accepted as reliable and genuine.

22

The second question that is raised in relation to determination of age is that of burden of proof. The Bombay High Court while adjudicating in the case of State v Dungaria Mahala held that it is the duty of the court to see that it does not exercise jurisdiction which it does not posses, thus the court has to make a thorough inquiry into the age of the accused. The same view has been reiterated by the High Courts of Andhra Pradesh, Allahabad and Rajasthan. Further still the High Court of Calcutta while then adjudicating in the case of Dilip Saha v State of WB stressed the view of the High Courts mentioned above and added that if either the officer producing the accused or the court itself failed to perform its duties cast under the Act, the child delinquents rights to be treated under the Act cannot be taken away.

The Supreme Court also strengthened the approach in two cases of Gopinath Ghosh and Bhola Bhagath v State of Bihar where it categorically stated that responsibility of adjudging the age of the accused in case of any doubts as brought forth lies with the Magistrate and the Court as dealing with the said matters.

The Supreme Court further in the case of Arnit Das stated that the court should avoid taking a hyper technical approach while appreciating evidence in regards to the age of the accused, whereby if two views are possible the court should lean in favour of holding the accused as a juvenile especially in borderline cases.

Therefore with the implementation of the amendments to the definition of a juvenile in conflict with the law and the inclusion of section 7 A, a set standard has been created which one hopes shall not leave such an important issue to unpredictable judicial interpretation.

The third change brought about is the deletion of the word ‘Group of Districts’ from section 6, i.e. constitution of the JJB for various districts. That there existed a serious problem of one JJB being constituted for a group of districts. The above entailed that children so arrested were taken far away from their homes and defeated the best interest policies of keeping the children within the ambit of their family structure. The deletion of the said word has thus made sure that every district will have its own JJB which shall make sure that the child is never too far away from his/r family.

23

Fourthly, there existed a problem of huge backlog of cases which has been to an extent rectified by the inclusion of sub clause (2) in section 14 which reads “The chief judicial magistrate or the chief metropolitan magistrate shall review the pendency of cases the board at every 6 months, and shall direct the board to increase the frequency of its sittings or may cause the constitution of additional boards.”

The inclusion of this clause, will go a long way in aiding Child Rights Organizations and NGO's who have time and again move to the Higher Courts seeking relief in the form of PIL's, specifically praying for the constitution of additional boards and for the increase in the number of their sittings. This in the long run will be beneficial both in the terms of time consumed in seeking basic constitutional rights, and also from a monetary view point .

Fourthly and most significantly, the inclusion of the words ‘life imprisonment’ in the section 16 (1), as was pointed out by Ved Kumari and which were detrimental towards achieving the goals of the Act, has finally been substituted but the words ' or imprisonment for any term which may extend to imprisonment for life'. This important substitution will thus prevent ‘conviction friendly’ judges as was in the case of Chanchu from sentencing juveniles to life.

Finally, the existing Section 21 which deals with the prohibition of the publication of the name and details of a juvenile, has been replaced by a new sec 21 which further adds to the old section through sub clause (2), an increased punishment of 25 thousand rupees from the existing punishment of one thousand rupees for the contravention of the provisions of sub clause 1 of the same section

These changes though few and limited, are along the lines of changes as suggested by the author and many other child rights activists and are a positive step towards the realization of rights as enshrined under the Crcpc

24

Chapter-2

Who Commits Juvenile Crime & Provisions 25

Who is a Child? • According to the UN Convention on Child Rights and Juvenile Justice Act, a child is someone who is less than 18 years of age. CHILD RIGHTS: • Child Rights are fundamental freedoms and the inherent rights of all human beings below the age of 18. These rights apply to every child, irrespective of 26

the child's, parent's / legal guardian's race, colour, sex, creed or other status.

27

Child Rights • In 1992, India ratified the United Nations Convention on Rights of the Child. The Charter of Child Rights (CRC) is built on the principle that "ALL children are born with fundamental freedoms and ALL human beings have some inherent rights". The Charter confers the following basic rights on all children across the world: • The right to survival - to life, health, nutrition, name and nationality • The right to development - to education, care, leisure, recreation • The right to protection - from exploitation, abuse, neglect • The right to participation - to expression, information, thought and religion

28

Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2000 The Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2000 is a comprehensive legislation to provide: • JUSTICE • OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE GROWTH • DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER & •REHABILITATION OF JUVENILES / CHILDREN

29

PREAMBLE An Act to consolidate and amend the law relating to juvenile in conflict with law and child in need of care and protection, by providing for: ––– PROPER CARE; PROTECTION; and TREATMENT by adopting a childfriendly approach catering to their development needs,  – ADJUDICATION AND DISPOSITION for their rehabilitation in the best interest of children 

30

CA TEGORIES OF CHILDREN – (a) Child in need of care and protection means a child – who is – » Homeless – » Having incapacitate parent – » Abandoned, missing or run away – » Victim of natural calamities – » Victim of armed conflict – » Victim of civil commotion – » Victim of sexual abuse – » Mentally or physically challenged – Mentally or physically ill – » Suffering with terminal diseases – » AIDS/HIV affected » Drug abused or trafficked – • (b) Juvenile in conflict is a juvenile who is alleged to have committed an offence. This category also includes child victims of crime

31

PRODUCTION CHILD IN NEED OF CARE AND PROTECTION JUVENILE IN CONFLICT WITH LAW JUVENILE JUSTICE ACT, 2000 CHILD WELFARE COMMITTEE JUVENILE JUSTICE BOARD

CHILD IN NEED OF CARE PROTECTIO

JUVENILE IN CONFLICT WITH

JUVENILE JUSTICE 2 CHILD COMMITTE

JUVENILE JUSTICE

32

Legal Issues Dealing with Children Under the Act, a child is defined as a person below the age of 18 years. UNCRC also lists down certain Articles for children: Article 2 (2): Protection against all forms of discrimination or punishment Article 3: Protect the best interests of children Article 19: Protect children from all forms of physical or mental violence, injury or abuse, neglect or negligent treatment, maltreatment or exploitation, including sexual abuse while in the care of parents, legal guardians or any other person in whose care they are. Article 25: Protection of the physical and mental health of the child • Article 33: Protection from illicit use of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances • Article34: Undertake to protect children from all forms of sexual exploitation and sexual abuse. Article 35: Take all appropriate national, bilateral and multi-lateral measures to prevent the abduction of, sale of or traffic in children for any purpose or in any form. • Article 36: Protection from all forms of exploitation prejudicial to any aspect of child’s welfare The Indian Constitution also lists down certain provisions: • Article 14: The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India • Article 15: The State shall not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, and place of birth or any of them • Article 15(3): Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from making any special provision for women and children. • Article 19(1) (a): All citizens shall have the right (a) to freedom of speech and expression; • Article 21: No person shall be deprived of his / her life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law. • Article 23: Traffic in human beings and beggary and other forms of forced labor are prohibited and any contravention of this provision shall be an offence punishable in accordance with the law. • Article 24: No child below the age of fourteen years shall be employed to work in any factory or mine or engaged in any other hazardous employment. • Article 38: The state shall strive to promote the welfare of the people by securing and protecting as effectively as it may a social order in which justice, social, economic and political, shall inform all the institutions of the national life. • Article 39: The state shall, in particular, direct its policy towards securing

33

• (e) that the health and strength of workers, men and women, and the tender age of children are not abused and that citizens are not forced by economic necessity to enter avocations unsuited to their age or strength and (f) that children are given opportunities and facilities to develop in a healthy manner and in conditions of freedom and dignity and that childhood and youth are protected against exploitation and against moral and material abandonment. Article 45: The State shall endeavor to provide, within a period of ten years from the commencement of this Constitution, for free and compulsory education for all children until they complete the age of fourteen years. Provision for free and compulsory education for children

34

Some key Provisions of the Juvenile Justice Act Section 4 : Juvenile Justice Board Section 29 : Child Welfare Committee Section 63 : Special Juvenile Police Unit Section 8 & 9 : Observation Home and Special Home Section 37& 44 : Children’s Home and Shelter Home Section 61 : Juvenile Justice Fund Section 62 : State Advisory Board Section 62 A : Constitution of Child Protection Unit Section 41 : Adoption Section 42 :Foster care Section 43 : Sponsorship PRODUCTION OF CHILD IN NEED OF CARE AND PROTECTION • By designated police officer or by • Special juvenile police • Social worker • Public servant • Public spirited citizen • Child himself • Childline • Voluntary organization • The child has to be produced before the child welfare committee within 24 hours

35

Chapter-3

PRODUCTION OF JUVENILE IN CONFLICT WITH LAW

36

PRODUCTION OF JUVENILE IN CONFLICT WITH LAW • By special juvenile police • By designated Police officer or Juvenile Child Welfare officer \ • By a voluntary organization • The juvenile must be produced immediately • On apprehension, police must inform the parents and the probation officer Important Sections in the Act • 23. Punishment for cruelty to juvenile or child.- Whoever, having the actual charge of, or control over, a juvenile or the child, assaults, abandons, exposes or wilfully neglects the juvenile or causes or procures him to be assaulted, abandoned, exposed or neglected in a manner likely to cause such juvenile or the child unnecessary mental or physical suffering shall be punishable with imprisonment for a team which may extend to six months, or fine, or with both. 24. Employment of juvenile or child for begging.-(1) Whoever employs or uses any juvenile or the child for the purpose or causes any juvenile to beg shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine. • 25. Penalty for giving intoxicating liquor or narcotic drug or psychotropic substance to juvenile or child.- Whoever gives, or causes to be given, to any juvenile or the child any intoxicating liquor in a public place or any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance except upon the order of duly qualified medical practitioner or in case of sickness shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall be liable to fine. • 26. Exploitation of juvenile or child employee.- Whoever ostensibly procures a juvenile or the child for the purpose of any hazardous employment keeps him in bondage and withholds his earnings or uses such earning for his own purposes shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall be liable to fine. • 27. Special offences.- The offences punishable under sections 23, 24, 25 and 26 shall be cognizable. • 28. Alternative punishment.- Where an act or omission constitute an offence punishable under this Act and also under any other Central or State Act, then, notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force, the offender found guilty of such offences shall be liable to punishment only under such Act as provides for punishment which is greater in degree.

37

ROLE OF THE POLICE PROVISIONS Child / Juvenile can’t be kept in jail or lockup Handcuff of juvenile/child prohibited Police officers to be instructed and trained in child issues Setting of special juvenile police unit in every police station

PRODUCTION OF JUVENILE Police must inform the parents of arrest of the juvenile Juvenile must be produced immediately before the JJB Produce the juvenile before the JJB Police officer may hand over the juvenile to VO Special juvenile police to produce juvenile before juvenile justice board

PRODUCTION OF CHILD Child in need of care and protection before the child welfare committee Special juvenile police to produce the • According to Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules 2007, in cases where the punishment is below 7 years, a police officer cannot file an FIR and can only make a DD entry. • The police should prepare a Social Background Report (SBR) of the children and submit it to the JJB along with all other documents e.g. DD entry, a report on the circumstances of apprehension, school certificate of the children if any, report of informing parents of the children if any, report of informing the Probation Officer (PO) if any etc • After the DD entry, as per the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules 2007, the police could hand over the children to their parents and ask them to bring the children to the JJB on the day the police would produce all documents before the JJB. • Ideally, since the law requires the police to produce such children before the JJB within 24 hours of apprehension, in cases with punishment of less than 7 years, they should produce all the paper work (at least the DD entry) before the JJB within 24 hours of the matter coming to their notice and seek a time from the JJB for preparing the SBR. • The JJB would subsequently call the children as and when required. Another possibility is to let the children be in the police station, but not in a lock up, along with their parents till such time that they are produced before the JJB, within 24 hours. • If the children are homeless then the police should mention this fact clearly in the Social Background Report (SBR) of the children and take them to the Observation Home for Boys (OHB). Similarly, if their parents are not willing to take the custody of their children, the police could take them to the OHB and then produce them before the JJB the next day, within 24 hours.

38

As per law, a child in conflict with law can be produced before a single member of the JJB. If a member is physically unavailable, the police can inform them over the phone and seek necessary orders or directions. • There are no link Magistrates attached to the JJBs. Hence it sometimes becomes difficult for police to decide on the course of action. If

the JJB is not sitting or a member of the JJB is not available, the police should produce the child before a regular Metropolitan Magistrate / Duty Magistrate with a detailed report on circumstances of apprehension and seek orders for placement of a child in the OHB till such time that the child is produced before the JJB or a member of the JJB. • According to sub-Rule (9) of Rule 11, there shall be no FIR in matters involving punishment of less than seven. Since the police will be required to file a Final Report, canceling the FIR, there is no question of filing a charge sheet. • On the issue of charge sheet in matters involving punishment of seven or more years, the Cr.PC shall invariable apply. Since the JJBs are required to complete all inquiries within four months, by way of practice, they have been asking the police to file the charge sheet within 60 days in matters involving children. If it is not possible for a police officer to file a charge sheet within this time, he can file an application in the JJB with a written explanation for seeking more time.

39

Some Important Do’s and Don'ts for Police Juveniles in need of care and protection. The police control room must be informed. Physical needs of the juvenile, like hunger or thirst or the need to go to toilet should be properly attended to. An entry in Daily Diary/ General Dairy should be made giving particulars of the children and reasons for coming to the police. A report on the prescribed Performa must be sent to the Missing Persons Squad through District Missing Persons Unit. Women police must accompany a girl on being produced before the Committee. If the parent is known, the child is to be restored. The children shall not be kept in the Police station. While handling the juvenile in conflict with law, the following should be kept in mind:Physical needs of the juvenile, like hunger or thirst or the need to go to toilet should be properly attended to. Extra care should be taken to create an impression when the juvenile is being questioned that he is not being interrogated as a thief or as a liar but that effort is being made to find out the truth in order to help him. The officer should not lose temper and make false promises. No bullying should be done during questioning. Display of sympathy and understanding so as to give the impression that the police officer is mainly interested in the welfare or good of the juvenile. Enquiries from the juvenile should be in privacy and in a comfortable environment. It should be ensured that there is no distraction when the juvenile is being questioned. The parents and guardians may be allowed to be present when the juvenile is being questioned. As far as possible, the juvenile should not be called to the police station but should be questioned either at his own home or some other premises which does not give too much of an official look. Care should be taken not to embarrass the juvenile. Girls should be handled by Women Officers. Statement made by a juvenile should be verified from independent sources as there is a possibility of exaggeration and distortion of facts. Information to parent, guardian or probation officer The officer in-charge of the Police Station or Juvenile Welfare Officer or the special juvenile police unit shall inform the parent or guardian of the juvenile, direct him to be present at the Board /CWC. He shall in form the probation officer of such juvenile to enable him to obtain information regarding the juvenile’s family background. Determination of age.(Sec.49)(Rule-12) In case of doubt, the benefit of doubt shall be in favour of the child in conflict with law for treating him/her as juvenile. In order to collect age proof, efforts should be made to collect his school certificate, municipal certificate, copy of ration card etc. If no document is available, ossification test may be conducted to ascertain the age. Age to be determined within a period of 30 days from the date of application before the Committee.

40

Chapter-4

Factors Leading To

Juvenile Delinquency

41

What are some of the reasons discussed in the text to help explain racial and gender differences in juvenile offending patterns? It is well known by criminologists that gender and race are factors in the criminal conduct and treatment of adult offenders. So too are the subject's sex and ethnic background a factor in youth deviancy. Both of these differences carry with them unique offending patterns and criminal justice needs, and while both of these diversity groups may offend in different rates or ways, it is a personal belief that gender has more of an effect on criminal behavior than race. Gender difference in juvenile offending is not as stark of a contrast as it used to be in previous generations. Early theory represented that female offenders were few and far between, seen as participating in crimes which were sexual in nature (such as prostitution) or emotionally charged. Due to a recent surge in interest into the female offender studies have shown very different results than what was previously thought. Female rates, compared to male rates which are substantially higher, are growing more rapidly than male offender rates (Siegel & Welsh, 2005), climbing six percent between 1993 and 2002 while their male counterparts' dropped sixteen percent. It is also important 42

to note that while the above figures are official arrest statistics, self reported data shows female deviancy as being even higher, and includes similar crimes to males. There are several reasons that help explain the differences in genders and criminal behavior. It is no question that social environment plays a part in the development of youth. Male and female youths are raise very differently in our modern society which may present an insight into their criminal habits. For example, males are socialized to be more aggressive, are less likely to form attachments, and respond to conflict through retaliation whereas females are encouraged to preserve relationships, internalize conflict, and are more closely supervised by social control agents (whether these are their parents or criminal justice personnel). This has a detrimental effect on females' self esteem, a possible cause for outbursts of deviancy. The issue of race as it relates to deviancy in youth is not as comfortable of a topic as gender. Long has higher arrest statistics for minority offenders spurred controversy throughout the criminal justice system. For example, arrest rates for all crimes between 1980 and 2002 show that African-American youth are arrested disproportionately for all crimes than their white counterparts. Why could this be? Researchers have narrowed it down to two possible causes, the first being that AfricanAmerican youth really do perform a disproportionate amount of crimes, however this is unreliable and encouraged studies to turn to self-reported statistics. Self reported information suggests that delinquent activity between black and white youth are quite similar, which leads believers of this information to conclude that those involved in the criminal justice process (law enforcement, judicial staff, etc.) are biased. If this is true, it would explain the high prison rates of African-Americans due to harsher punishments and

43

non-intervention in their initial contact with the law. Several theories expound upon possible explanations for race and gender in deviant activity. As for gender, social development theory seems to be the most appropriate given the radical differences in the growth of males and females within the social and family structures and the formation and enforcement of scripts according to the gender-schema theory. Race is highly affected by social class and economical status, fitting into the theory of anomie. Cloward and Ohlin (1960) built upon Merton's strain theory with some of their own ideas and formed their theory of differential opportunity. They cited that those who are given or perceive to have less legitimate opportunity to succeed then turn to illegitimate means in order to gain status. Identifying the basis of both gender and race differences in juvenile delinquency--and crime in general--is vital in order to provide alternative means to crime for potential offenders. Discuss labeling theory. What are some of the policies or programs designed to reduce delinquency based on this perspective? Of the several social reaction theories in the criminal justice community labeling is, I believe, the most influential and substantiated when it comes to juvenile delinquency. Youth are highly susceptible to the world's influence on them as well as the labels that are placed on them by their environments. This outside stimuli affects the youth's view on themselves and their environment, either helping reduce or increase the risk of anti-social and deviant behavior. According to an original labeling researcher, Tannenbaum concluded that a youth's tendency to minimize their deviant activity as "fun" or "adventure" is in direct conflict with how society views their actions (1938). This conflict of interpretation leads

44

to what Tannenbaum refers to as the "dramatization of evil," and ultimately labeling the youth as the evildoer. This idea leads to the youth being stigmatized, and according to Goffman, this leads to the youth seeing these stigma symbols as an accurate definition of their growing identity (1963). This stigma helps to promote and reinforce degradation ceremonies such as trials, public punishments, etc., which as described by Garfinkel (1956) enforces the label on the youth and presents the idea that society is against the youth. With this newfound knowledge of how society feels, the youth may then view the label of "deviant," "criminal," or any of the plethoras of other terms as their master status. Becker (1963) affirms that this master status is the acceptance that they are deviant and drastically reduces their chances of correction. Programs which would likely be effective against labeling theory when dealing with the juvenile delinquency problem would be those which help to minimize the labeling of early deviant behavior and provide a chance at correction. Diverting initial contact with the traditional criminal justice system for youth and focusing on community building on the macro level, I believe, will also help the youth on the micro level. Deinstitutionalized punishment forms are along these lines so called "boot camps," community corrections programs, and youth treatment centers which focus on repairing the delinquent conduct before it escalates to fully criminal behavior in addition to or instead of the more formal ways of punishing. It is important to punish offenders for the crimes they commit in order to show them that the behavior will not be tolerated in society. Labeling the offender in a permanent manner, however, works against the concept of corrections and helps to ensure that offenders keep offending with little chance of integration into productive society.

45

Describe parenting styles that can insulate youth from delinquency while also producing a well-adjusted adolescent. Parenting and its various styles are at the very heart of the issue when speaking on juvenile delinquency. Parenting has in many ways become "hands-off" as in two parent families both parents may work. Add to this the phenomenon of Blackberry Parenting (The Wall Street Journal, 2006) and the parents who extensively work at home and it can be obvious that parenting is not what it used to be. In order to understand how vital parenting is to a youth's development one must understand the theory of social bond and how the family unit influences behavior. According to Travis Hirschi social bond theory contains four main concepts that, depending on how well they are addressed socially in a child's life, can either help them succeed legitimately in life or walk down the path of deviancy: attachment, commitment, involvement, and belief (1972). Through strong attachments to parents, siblings, teachers, and friends a youth can have positive role models and sources of advice and guidance. Commitment to positive goals such as success in school, a solid career, and even wealth can help keep a youth focused on the right path. Through involvement in sports, community organizations, extra-curricular activities, and social clubs, the youth has a better chance to form lasting bonds with others while being shown the importance of becoming a functional member of society. Finally, belief in positive qualities such as morality, service, and responsibility learned from the other three branches can help the youth integrate into a productive adulthood. There are four major areas in the family environment which heavily influence delinquent behavior in youth: Breakup, conflict, neglect, and deviance. Family breakup

46

(divorce, parental separation) is more commonplace in our time. Studies have shown that children who grow up outside of the influence of their father perform less in school, are not as likely to attend college, or have stable employment later in life (Siegel & Welsh, 2005: 160). It is important to note that males are more impacted by the lack of a father, but girls do not go unaffected. Girls tend to be more affected by the quality of parenting by the mother and are heavily influenced by any post-breakup or divorce conflict which ensues between her parents. While many families separate due to conflict, many others stay together and include it. According to F. Ivan Nye, a youth’s perception on the happiness and quality of relationship between their parents is a heavy indicator of future delinquency (Siegel & Welsh: 161). Nye also found that there is little difference between a child who merely witnessed conflict in the family structure and those who are a direct victim of it. Often when conflict is present, neglect is as well. Parental efficacy, raising a child with noncoercive but supporting discipline, is found to help strengthen the child’s resistance to deviant behavior. Unfortunately, many families who experience serious conflict do not follow this practice and the child tends to turn to outside influences and exhibit deviant behavior. Likewise, inconsistent supervision and discipline by the parents also contribute to criminal mindsets by showing youth that punishment is not always guaranteed and there are ways to act criminally with it being okay. As youth grow and develop there becomes less and less of a requirement for a parental bond, however information suggests that the positive effect this bond has is still considerable (Siegel & Welsh: 162). Deviancy which runs in a family, which is children who have a long line of relatives who act in a deviant manner in their environment while developing, helps

47

contribute to a child’s views on this behavior. Information shows that youth with criminal fathers are 37% more likely to become criminal, in contrast to the 8% of those without (Siegel & Welsh: 164): This is nearly five times more likely. Sibling influence also plays a huge role, as in families where conflict and neglect exists, a child is provided with another of similar age and experience who they can bond with. If the elder of the two follow a deviant path, the younger is likely to as well out of similar interest and imitating actions. Parenting is no easy task, and I do not believe there to be any higher responsibility than that of raising a child to be part of our world’s future. Unfortunately, marital conflict, modern technology, and the daily hustle and bustle of normal life can detract from the relationship a child has with their parents. When a child does not have a solid, stable relationship which supports their bond positively deviance is more likely to follow in their life. The weaker that bond may be, the stronger the attraction to criminality

48

Chapter-5

Magnitude of the Problem of Juvenile Delinquency

49

Magnitude of the Problem of Juvenile Delinquency This Chapter examines the magnitude of the problem of juvenile del inquency in India. During 1996, there were 17,09,576 incidence of cognizable of fences out of them 10,024 were as such in which juvenile committed the crimes. Thus the rate of percentage of juvenile crime to the total crimes committed by al l , was 0.6. The incidence and rate of juvenile delinquency during the last five years are given in the table below. The percentage of juvenile delinquency to total crimes during the year 1996 was low as compared to the previous year 1995. Table - I Incidence and Rate of Juvenile Delinquency Under Indian Penal Code (1992-96) Sno

Year 1 2 3 4 5

no of crimes Total 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996

11,100 16,89,341 9,456 8,561 9,766 10,024

16,29,936 16,35,251 16,95,696 17,09,576

% 0.70% 0.60% 0.50% 0.60% 0.80%

There is a declining t rend in the share of juvenile crime in relation to total IPC crimes committed in India since 1990, despite an increase in population in the country from 1.8 per cent during 1990, the share of juvenile crime has steadily gone down each year to 0.5 per cent in 1996. The crime rate was low in

50

1996 (0.5 percent ) Magnitude of the Juvenile Delinquency According to Cr ime in India, 1996, published by the Nat ional Crime Records Bureau, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government , during the year 1996, a total of 10,024 IPC Cases were registered against juveniles which shows a increase of 2.6 per cent over 1995 (9,766 cases) . A increasing t rend was not iced in overall number of crime heads. The significant increase amongst these crimes were Arson (312.5%) , Hurt /Grievous Hurt (76.4%) , Dowry Deaths (55.6%) , Molestation (36.0%) , and Cheating (11.1%) . The decrease in incidence of crimes was not iced in crimes such as Sexual Harassment (51.9%) , Criminal breach of t rust (45.5%) , Theft (16.9%) , Cruelty by husband or relatives (13.5%) , Kidnapping and Abduct ion (13.2%) , Rape (9.8%) and Riots (10.4%) . Out of 10,024 IPC Cases, which were registered against juvenile in 1996, Madhya Pradesh (2372) , Maharashtra (1824) and Bihar (1584) accounted high incidence of juvenile cases under the IPC. These States represented 57.8 percent of the total incidence recorded in the country. Theft (2356) , Burglary (1315) and Hur t /Grievous Hurt (1375) constituted 50.5 percent of the total juvenile IPC Crimes. Maharashtra reported the highest incidence of Theft (560) and Burglary cases against juvenile among the States and Union Territory in the count ry. Madhya Pradesh reported the highest juvenile crime case of Attempt to Commit Suicide(68) and Rape (57) , in the country.

Nature of Offences During the year 1996, cases against 14,068 boys and 5,030 girls were brought before the court as against cases of 14,542 boys and 4,251 gi r ls in the year 1995. This shows an increase of crimes of 1.6 percentage of girls in 1996 over 1995. Table 3 below gives the details of juveniles apprehended under IPC and SLL Crime by age group 1992-96. During the year 1995, 18.0 per cent juveniles apprehended in the age group of 7-12 years whereas during 1996, the percentage was 18.2. Thus, there is an increase of apprehension of juveniles under this age group. The percentage of juveniles apprehended in the age group of 12-16 years was decreased from 63.9 in 1995 to 59.7 per cent in 1996. However , this percentage was increased in the age group of 16-18 from 18.1 to 22.1 per cent in 1996. The highest percentage (22.1) of juvenile apprehended in the year 1996 was recorded in the age group of 16-18 years. In the age group 7-12 years of age, out of 3471 juveniles, 193 were girls in 1996 which recorded about 5.9 per cent of girls. This percentage of girls was also about 5.9 per cent in the age group of 12-16 years. Out of total 19,098 juveniles, 5030 were gi r ls (26.3 per cent ) apprehended under IPC and SLL

51

Crimes during 1996. Madhya Pradesh apprehended highest number of juveniles (3388) in the country during 1996 followed by Maharashtra (2384) and Gujarat (1084) under IPC Crimes. In Bihar , more juveniles were involved in Riots than any other State/UT. Madhya Pradesh recorded highest juvenile offenders in Hurt /Grievous Hurt (667) . Maharashtra recorded the highest juvenile offenders in cases of Cruel ty by husband or relat ives (150) . As far as SLL Cases are concerned, Tamilnadu (3096) followed by Madhya Pradesh (1586) and Bihar (874) reported higher juvenile offenders in the country during the year 1996. Delhi recorded the highest (497) juvenile of fenders in IPC Crimes followed by Bombay (200) and Pune(129) during 1996. Surat City top in recording SLL Crime cases (411) followed by Madurai (301) and Mumbai (248) during 1996. The proportion of girls in the apprehended juvenile reached 26.3 per cent which was the highest in the last six years. During the year 1996, the ratio of boys and girls arrested for committing IPC and SLL Crimes was 2.8, 5.1 and 24.3 in the age groups of 7-12 years, 1216 years and 16-18 years of age respectively. Bihar (527) and Maharashtra (322) contributed higher juveniles in the age group of 7-12 years. Maharashtra alone recorded 57.0 per cent of the total girls apprehended in the age group of 7-12 years in the country under IPC Crimes during 1996. The juveniles apprehended in the age group of 12-16 years f rom Maharashtra (1438) and Madhya Pradesh (2283) shared about 49.0 per cent of the total juveniles apprehended in the country. The juveniles girls apprehended in the age group of 16-18 years for IPC cases were high (494) in 1996 in Bihar followed by Maharashtra (432) in 1996. Table 4 below shows the magnitude of juvenile delinquency by economic background during 1992 to 1996. Low income group (upto Rs 500/ -) constitute more that half (54.1 per cent ) of the total juveniles apprehended under IPC and SLL Crimes cases. Only 1.3 per cent cases come from the income group having Rs 3000/ - and above. It shows that economic factor plays an important role for decreasing the juvenile delinquency. During the year 1996, 6,599 cases were pending disposal at the end of the year in the juvenile courts in the country. Madhya Pradesh (2362) and Maharasht ra (1470) reported higher pendency in disposal of the juveniles apprehended. Arunachal Pradesh, Manipur , Nagaland, Punjab, Sikkim, Tripura and Ut tar Pradesh reported 100 percent disposal of apprehended juveniles. Of the total arrested juveniles 20.4 percent of the juveniles were disposed, after advice and admonition whereas more than 38 per cent cases were pending at the end of the year 1996. S Poor economic set up are general ly the main attributes for delinquent behaviours of the juveniles. Of the total juveniles who were involved in various Crimes, 80.0 per cent were either illiterate (8195) or had education upto primary level (7080) . Children who are under care and living with parents (14293) and guardians (2922) who constituted 90.1 percent of the juveniles

52

apprehended were involved in Crimes. The share of juvenile delinquents belonging to upper income group (above Rs 3000/ - p.m. ) also decreased from 2.1 per cent in 1994 to 1.3 per cent in 1996. However , in lower middle group (Rs 500/ - p.m. to Rs. 1000/ - p.m. ) , the share of juvenile delinquents went up from 28.7 per cent in 1994 to 32.9 per cent in 1996. As compared to 1995, the recidivism shown by the juvenile criminals is higher and from 8.2 per cent in 1995, i t has increased to 12.5 per cent in 1996. Significant recidivism tendency is not iced from the juveniles who were apprehended in the States of Bihar (40.3%) , Tamilnadu (15.8%) , Gujarat (15.5) , Assam (11.5%) and Maharashtra (7.9%) . Delhi recorded 16.1% such cases.136 were the old of fenders thereby a record of recidivism of 99.3 per cent was observed.

Chapter-6

NEWSPAPER ARTICLE DICUSSING RISE IN JUVENILE DELIQUENCY 53

Express Newspaper Report ANGRY YOUNG BOYS With 210 children detained in 129 cases, it is juvenile crime that is giving jitters to city Prasannakumar Keskar

Pune, July 17: Last month when a group of boys, who had stolen hardware from a shop at Bhosari, murdered their playmate out of fear that he may blow the whistle on them, it gave a jolt to the city. After increasing cases of crime against women, Pune is witnessing another trend: juvenile crime. Sample this: eight murders, nine attempted murders, one rape, three molestations, 41 assaults, 12 burglaries, 17 vehicle thefts, 26 thefts and five rioting cases — a total of 129 crimes — till June 30 this year. If you thought this was on the resume of some dreaded gangster, wait a minute: as per the statistics available

54

with the Pune police, all these crimes have been committed by children between 10 and 17 years of age. Here is the low down: WHO IS A JUVENILE? According to the Juvenile Justice Act, any child who has not completed 18 years of age is juvenile. THE NUMBERS Between January 1 and June 30, 201 children, including a girl, were detained by the police for suspected involvement in 129 crimes In the corresponding period of 2004 — 210 children — two of them girls — had been detained by the police for suspected involvement in 133 crimes All the detained children belonged to 10-17 year age group CRIMES COMMITTED Murder, attempted murder, rape, molestation, kidnapping, assault, dacoity, robbery, burglary, vehicle theft, petty theft, rioting and assault on government employee THE LAW SAYS AS per the Juvenile Justice Act, the police cannot arrest a juvenile, they can only detain the child. The identity of the detained child cannot be disclosed to the media and the detained child is required to be produced before the Juvenile Board immediately, after which the child is sent to the observation centre. They can be questioned by the police, but only in presence of Juvenile Board members. The police cannot prepare history-sheets of juveniles or treat them like offenders. Cases of juvenile crimes are tried before the Juvenile Board. WHY THEY BECOME DELINQUENT? Assistant commissioner of police (Crime) Sanjay Jadhav lists out different reasons for increasing trend of juvenile crime: Negligence of parents makes a child feel lonely Peer pressure through bad company also plays a vital role Increasing consumerism in society Portrayal of crime and the underworld by the electronic media and films Introducing children to the world of grown-ups at an early stage POSITIVE POLICE ACTION ‘‘The baseline is that no child is a criminal and the children detained for suspected involvement in juvenile crimes must get full opportunity to reform,’’ says Sanjay Jadhav. Thus, the Pune police has taken upon itself to reform and rehabilitate these children by asking the cops to deal with this problem sensitively and compassionately and by launching the Juvenile Aid Police Unit (JAPU) on January 26 this year. WHAT IS JAPU? It is a special unit comprising an inspector, two sub-inspectors and some constables from crime branch. It counsels delinquents and reforms and rehabilitates them with the help of various NGOs and members of the Juvenile

55

Board.

India Today Article

Rage of Innocents More and more children show a worrisome violent trait in everyday behaviour. Just how bad is the problem, and what can parents do about it?

As six-year-old Himanshu climbed on to the sofa in the drawing room of his south Delhi home, his mother asked him what he would like to do when he grew up. "Dadagiri," replied Himanshu, with an expression that evoked grins. Himanshu knows that it is bullying that makes his nine-year-old brother, Dewang, the most obeyed boy in his group. The only problem: Dewang is currently under psychotherapeutic care. One evening when their grandmother became persistent about homework, Dewang gave her a "choke slam", a wrestling move picked up from WWF that sprained the old lady's neck. Shocking? Meet Vinay Anand, 4, from suburban Mumbai, who spews deadly anger. He shouts, "I'll kill you," as he pummels his father.

56

Delhi alone has witnessed several cases of manic rage among children in recent days. Last week, two-year-old Bhavana (name changed) was raped by her 14-year-old neighbour in his house, where Bhavana's mother had left her and subsequently found her bleeding. A few weeks ago, a 12-year-old girl from west Delhi was gangraped by three teenagers, who too left her bleeding and numb with shock. Earlier, on January 13, Arihant Jain, 8, committed suicide because his parents insisted on sending him back to the hateful hostel life in Dehradun. Five days later, a 17-year-old boy bludgeoned his mother to death with a hammer as he was fed up with her for haranguing him about neglecting his studies and spending time with his girlfriend instead. All are uncommon cases, but "they need to be seen as a background for the individual vulnerabilities of children in problems of impulse control", says Shekhar Seshadri, associate professor of psychiatry at nimhans, Bangalore. Every decade has had psychologists observing aggression in children as a regular pattern of growing up. But now, not only are there more aggressive youngsters but this anger is being manifested in violent, at times ruthless, behaviour. What were earlier sweet squeals of protest among children are now turning into rebellious "give-it-to-me-or-else" violent screams. The stabbed Barbie dolls and beheaded G.I. Joes found in cupboards are symbols of the latent anger that brews in their minds. When parents say that innocence in children is vanishing, they are not exaggerating. Normal, functional family children are learning to shout at and abuse their peers, even parents and teachers, or hit people on impulse as forms of everyday communication, not as a personality disorder. Though there haven't been many relevant studies in India on this issue, some recent ones show a rise in violence among children. A study conducted by the Indian Council for Medical Research quoted in the World Health Report released by who in December 2001 says 12 per cent of children in India below 16 years have behavioural problems-an increase of approximately 4 per cent in the past six years. The study was conducted in Lucknow and Bangalore and included rural and urban children and slum children from urban areas. Expressions, a programme started by vimhans (Vidyasagar Institute of Mental Health and Neuro Sciences) in Delhi in 1998, which covers 90-110 government and public schools in Delhi and adjoining satellite towns, studies child and adolescent behaviour. In its figures for 2001-2, 12 per cent of the children studied (3-12 years) are listed as aggressive. The project coordinator of Expressions, psychiatrist Jitendra Nagpal, says the project involved the use of 8,000 questionnaires with 48 questions each and answered by parents and teachers. The parents were asked to list specifics like their wards breaking TV sets or using kitchen knives for assault. According to the National Crime Records Bureau, the number of children apprehended under the IPC for juvenile violence rose from 17,203 (7-18 years) in 1994 to 18,460 in 2000. But Amod Kanth, joint commissioner of police, Delhi Police, one of the members who drafted the new Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act, 2000, emphasises that the NCRB figures give an understated picture of juvenile crimes because many such acts in affluent families go unreported. "Also, children who are arrested by the police are often wrongfully produced in adult courts," he says. The fury of children is not restricted to homes. School campuses too are becoming grounds of volatile communication. "If one youngster finds something humiliating, the entire classroom turns hostile towards the teacher," says educationist Shyama Chona, principal of Delhi Public School, R.K. Puram, Delhi.

57

This anger in children, caution experts, should be heeded as a ticking bomb. Sarah Santhini of Christian Medical College, Vellore, says that violent children need immediate psychological first aid. The innocence with which children relate to the world is the first casualty. Gone is the fascination for fairy tales. The favoured content on films, TV and computer war games is umpteen frames of violence. "Boredom time is imagination time, but TV is taking that away, making even the playground uninteresting," says Nagpal. This trend of violence due to media influences has not been observed only in India. In April 2001, a US study reported evidence that violence in media spurs aggression. "The brains of children treat entertainment violence as real violence," wrote John P. Murray, psychology professor at Kansas State University. The underlying causes of the angry demeanour of children are numerous. Though many parents now claim they are "good friends" with their children, the difference between preaching and practice is gaping. Super expectations from ambitious parents, peer pressure, low tolerance for peer rejection, working and often warring parents as soulless icons of nuclear families with more money but less time for children, lonely sons and daughters left in day care or with domestic helps and lack of space to play and vent emotions is a complicated bundle of factors that contribute to rage. It doesn't help that most adult-child relationships are based on expectation, instruction and control instead of recognition of the child as a person. Parents, who are realising with dismay that parenting is a tricky, trial-and-error process with no absolute answers, are now being counselled to try non-aggressive problem solving. Liza Hazarika, a counsellor in Kolkata, says that "parents end up mishandling a child's anger due to ignorance or extreme oscillation in their own behaviour". Old ways of dealing with children like emotional blackmail, punishment or sweet talking and cajoling by materialistic bribing seem to have flip-sides. "Don't give them turf, teach them also how to run and the consequences of running on the wrong track," advises Nagpal, who expresses concern that only 10 per cent of Delhi schools have counsellors. Workshops are now being held in metros like Delhi and Bangalore, based on the life skills management modules for children prescribed by who. Parents and teachers are trained to become emotional cushions for children. Psychiatrists Shobha Srinath and Seshadri at NIMHANS, who constantly face questions from concerned guardians, advise that the exposure of children to violence at home, community and media should be decreased. Violence begets violence. "Give me a child and I will make him a thief, a lawyer or doctor," said British behavioural psychologist J.B. Watson, emphasising nurture as the force that moulds nature. A lot depends on what gets written on the blank slate of a mind that a child is born with

WHAT THE STUDIES SAY » An epidemiological study conducted by the Indian Council for Medical 58

Researchquoted in the World Health Report released by WHO in December 2001 says 12 per cent of children in India below 16 years have behavioural problems. » A study by VIMHANS, Delhi, which studied primary and middle level students (3-12 years) from 110 schools from Delhi and adjoining towns also found 12 per cent of the children displaying aggressive behaviour

FACETS OF FURY "I feel very tense before my exams.I beat my brother and hit my mother if she intervenes.I feel angry with my father for beating me if I do badly in school. I feel so worthless." 17-year-old Ashok "I raped a three-month-old baby. The supervisor here says that I can make up for my sin if I marry her. But I don't want to marry her." 14-year-old Islammuddin at the child supervision home run by the Social Welfare Department, Delhi

59

"Kill him, shoot him, break his neck and leg." Children at an apperception test at a Mumbai clinic on what they would do if they had to overcome compition

"When Gurmeet (my friend) said bad words about my Papa being always drunk, I wanted to kill him.I hit him with my bat and he had to be taken to the doctor. But I am not sorry. If he abuses my papa, I will beat him again." 12-year-old Naman from Delhi

"My mom once yelled at me and said that if I continued to be a misbehaved child, I could not be her son. I broke the TV set, the windows in the drawing room and set fire to my books. I have never spoken to her after that."12-year-old K. Jayaram

THE LAW AND VIOLENT CHILDREN

Little Justice

NEVER TOO YOUNG: Rehabilitating violent At the Child Court in Delhi's GTB Nagar, a kindly children is a difficult proposition in constable is leading two boys by the wrists (no handcuffs) towards the chamber where their case will the absence of infrastructure be heard by a judge. Their crime? Breaking car windows. But there won't be any

60

of the sharp cross-questioning usually seen when a criminal case is being heard in court. And post hearing, they won't go to jail. They'll go to the government-run observation home a few kilometres away. But this is a recent development-as late as 1988, children were routinely being held in adult lock-ups. This is because the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which defines what constitutes crimes like "hurt" (causing physical injury) or "murder", does not specifically define "child" but treats anyone above the age of 12 as an adult (Section 32 of IPC lays down that "Nothing is an offence which is done by a child under seven years of age" while Section 33 says that "Nothing is an offence which is done by a child above seven years of age and under 12"). In response to a petition filed by an Indian Express journalist about the widespread abuse of children in Tihar (Sanjay Suri vs Delhi Administration), the Supreme Court in 1988 held that children cannot be jailed with adults.

It's an issue that evokes passionate response across the world, and the advocates of therapy are often shouted down by those who want harsher punishment. An estimated 8,000 children are in the US jails meant for adults every year, France's highest court has allowed city authorities to ban unaccompanied minors after dark following a wave of juvenile crime and Britain's remand homes report almost 1,000 cases of self-inflicted harm by the incarcerated youth-eating glass, cutting wrists-every year. The prevailing Indian law, given in the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act, 2000, is relatively gentle, differentiating between children who break the law and their adult counterparts. It takes those less than 18 years of age to be "children" and recommends a probe by a Juvenile Justice Board as opposed to trial in the open court. But it's not without problems. The Act leaves it to the states to establish juvenile justice boards, officers and homes, but many fail to do so. Inquiries are supposed to last a maximum of four months, but often take years. Says Supreme Court advocate Renu George, closely associated with several childcare NGOs: "There are too many hurdles in rehabilitating children who commit violent crimes: the boards are politicised as they are supervised by the government of the day. And unlike many other countries, we do not have the facilities to monitor the child's progress after he leaves the observation home."

61

Teen killers, a disturbing phenomenon NDTV REPORT The murder of 17-year-old Mumbai teenager Mukeem Khan by his classmates brought back painful memories for Aslam Patrawala. Two years ago, his 16-yearold son Adnan was kidnapped and killed by his friends for ransom. It is a case, which is uncannily similar to Mukeem's murder. "I feel there are many similarities between this case and mine. I just want to say that parents have to be careful with their children, monitor where they are," Adnan's father Aslam Patrawala said. Like Adnan, Mukeem was the victim of a premeditated murder. The killers were friends and classmates from his college. Both boys were in their teens. But this is not just the case in Mumbai. Newspapers are filled with the news of 62

alarming rise in juvenile crime. If we go by the cases occurring in February only, a shocking rise in crimes presents an alarming situation. An eight-year-old slit throat of his six-year-old neighbour over a game in New Delhi. In Kota, a 12-year-old killed eight-year-old friend during a fight. Also, many 12 to 16 year old Delhi boys were arrested for thefts and these were not just street children, but also those from well-off families. "I feel there is this need to flaunt money and gadgets, which is a great need on the part of today's generation and they will go to any extent to do that. Children who have a desire to kill are very restless and parents must watch out for these signs and sit down with them and ask them listen what's going on," said Dr Rajendra Barve, a child psychiatrist. The murder of Mukeen Khan by his friends is not a one-off case. Rise in juvenile crimes is a matter of concern across the country. December 13, 2007 at 8:18 am ·

Pune Times : Even as the incident of two school students shooting their classmate in Gurgaon on Tuesday sent shock waves through the country, the juvenile crime profile of the city showed increasing involvement of minors in crimes like mobile phone and motorcycle thefts. However minors from slum pockets were also found to be involved in more serious crimes like rape and murder. Rajendra Bhamre, police inspector at the special security cell of Pune police said that from March to December 2006 the city police registered 230 crimes committed by minors in which 270 minors were booked. This year, the number has increased significantly with the police recording 362 crimes and booking 470 minors between January and November 2007. “The 63

majority of the crimes were petty theft and vehicle theft. Many of the minors were from the slums areas,” Bhamre stated. He said that minors from the upper middle class were found to be involved in offences like driving without licences. It may be noted that last month the city crime branch exposed a case where two youths, Ishwar Dandoli (25) and Sagar Pujari (35) confessed that they had used minor children to steal mobile phones worth Rs 16.50 lakh. The children were hired from areas like Hadapsar, Mahatma Phule market, Laxmi road, Market yard and Nigdi and were given Rs 100 per mobile stolen by them.

64

65

Chapter7

CONCLUSION

66

Conclusion In my opinion the main cause of increase of JUVINILE JUSTICE is today misleading trends ,ego lack of patience ,short way to earn money ,lack of respect towards other, sex , uncontrollable temper and less of love and care by parents due to their own problem or giving less time to their children ……… …. If these things are removed or taken care of, then JUVINILE JUSTICE will decrease

67