IN BOTH DEVELOPING AND DEVELOPED SOCIETIES, children often seem to fall through the cracks of policy: especially children in conflict with the law. It is often said that since children do not have a vote, in the eyes of the rule-makers they do not have a voice. This article will explore a few of many challenges that are confronted by this vulnerable group by briefly examining how India treats juveniles accused of criminal offences.
Children in conflict with the law
In India, there are limited options for children in conflict with the law. The lack of structured support and care for children is resultantly a prevailing issue. The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘JJ Act’) aims to rehabilitate rather than punish. The Act is a landmark piece of legislation in India that is drafted to deal specifically with children in conflict with the law. Children are not placed in adult jails but are instead sent to Children’s Homes that are meant to offer a safe, clean environment for their care and rehabilitation. The JJ Act sets out [detailed] guidance on the management of various offences and provides direction for the constitution of a Juvenile Justice Board (‘JJB’).
Children in conflict with the law are assigned to several types of facilities depending on the nature of their offence and/or the stage of their incumbent legal proceeding. Those who are awaiting trial or inquiry are kept in Observation Homes, which provide temporary shelter and basic care, until the JJB decides whether the child is guilty or not. If a child is found guilty, they will eventually be moved to a special home. These destinations serve as long-term custodial care for children who have been convicted. However, as per Section 18 of the JJ Act, no child can be kept in a special home for more than three years. The home for boys in Majnu ka Tila, Delhi is an example of such a Special Home.
Children in conflict with the law are assigned to several types of facilities depending on the nature of their offence and/or the stage of their incumbent legal proceeding.
Majnu Ka Tila, Special Home for Boys, Delhi, India
If a child is found not guilty, they are usually released into the care of their family. When this is not possible, such as in cases of neglect or unsafe home conditions, the child may be placed in a Children’s Home, which is designed for children in need of care and protection rather than rehabilitation or punishment.
For instance, a 14- year old Kashmiri teen was arrested in 2006 on suspected terror charges - but when his age was established, he was remanded into care instead of facing incarceration.
For children accused of heinous crimes, or pending transfer to the adult court, there are ‘Places of Safety’. These were created by the 215 amendments to the JJ Act, and are used when the JJB decides that a 16–18-year-old accused of a heinous offence (murder, rape, terrorism etc.) may be tried as an adult. These places of safety house juveniles who have turned eighteen or older while their case is still pending or while they are serving their sentence, so they are not transferred to adult prisons.
Unfortunately, the reality of these institutions is far from what it is intended to be. Many are overcrowded, particularly boys’ homes, and there is a lack of properly trained staff. Sanitation and nutrition are often poor; and serious safety concerns exist, with reports of frequent fights, gang-related activity, and in some tragic cases, fatal assaults.
A deeply concerning example occurred earlier this year when a 17-year-old boy was beaten to death over bathing arrangements at Delhi’s juvenile home in Majnu Ka Tila. This alarming incident sparked intense scrutiny over the supervision and security of such facilities, with officials under growing pressure to ensure that similar outbreaks of violence are prevented in the future. Once a child’s sentence is complete, and the child is due to be released, they are likely to be placed in an aftercare home or integrated back into the community. Aftercare homes are supposed to offer education and job placement assistance - but they are poorly implemented in India and are limited in capacity , leading to many youths going back to unsafe environments. This, in turn, creates a high likelihood of youths reoffending. Research highlights that aftercare services are inadequate.
For instance, in Delhi’s state-run addiction juvenile facility, there was a clear pattern in the amount of “in and out cases” noted more than five times in two years, in which young boys ended up re-entering the system multiple times. In some cases, after release, juveniles are simply abandoned and no follow-up on care or support is provided. In effect, they are given no real help or assistance in reintegrating them back to society.
The juvenile justice system in India has been ideologically designed to focus on rehabilitation, rather than punishment.
Conclusion
The juvenile justice system in India has been ideologically designed to focus on rehabilitation, rather than punishment: it recognises that children in conflict with the law need guidance and support to reintegrate back into society. Unfortunately, the implementation of these laws remains somewhat weak, as many institutions fail to eventually provide the structures of care that they promise. The example of Majnu Ka Tila illustrates glaring issues present in the current system. Overall, the absence of structured support and effectively managed rehabilitation facilities for young boys across India leads to cycles of reoffending, violent behaviour, and deeper involvement in gang activity.