Suruchi Kumari is a third-year LL.B. student at the Campus Law Centre, Faculty of Law, University of Delhi, with a bachelor’s degree from Miranda House, University of Delhi. Read More
Abstract
This article concerns whether a juvenile should be tried as an adult. It examines the contentious issue of whether minors should be tried as adults, with a focus on high-profile cases such as the Nirbhaya case and the Pune Prosche case.It critically analyzes the implications of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, which aims to balance the need for accountability with the principles of rehabilitation for minors. The article discusses the criticisms of the Act, including concerns about board decision based on child’s maturity, the act’s effectiveness in preventing juvenile crime and the adequacy of its rehabilitation provisions. Through a nuanced exploration of these perspectives, the article seeks to contribute to the ongoing debate surrounding juvenile justice in India, weighing the need for justice against the potential for reform.
Keywords- Juvenile, minor, justice, heinous crime
Introduction
A juvenile is someone who does not understand what is right and wrong. A crime committed by a juvenile is a crime committed under the age of eighteen, regardless of the seriousness of the offence. Although juvenile crime is not a new crime, in recent times it has gained prominence in Indian news stories. If all charges against a person above the age of 18 are proven true, they have a good probability of being severely punished for whatever horrible crimes they may have committed. However, things could not be the same when it comes to minors. Over the years, there have been occasions where juveniles have committed horrible crimes, but the punishments meted out have not always adhered to the criteria of a heinous crime. Police estimates state that 10–12 juveniles are apprehended in Delhi each month for murder.[1]According to a recent study by the NCRB, as reported by The Indian Express news website, 30,555 crimes were committed by minors in 2022. Delhi came in sixth place with 2,340 or more instances involving juveniles. Over 2,643 cases were brought against juveniles in 2020. From 2017-2021, 13000 crimes were committed by juveniles. [2]
The data of NCRB gives the glimpse of 314 murders,412 attempt to murder and over 500 rapes,475 cases of assault or criminal force against women with intention to outrage her modesty, 982 examples of causing hurt or grievous hurt. The public’s outrage over the juvenile offenders’ horrific crimes receiving little to no punishment has never subsided. [3]
The Nirbhaya case from 2012 is one of the most well-known incidents; six men were accused, one of them was a juvenile. Out of the six, four were found guilty, and Ram Singh, one of the accused, committed suicide while incarcerated before to his trial. The juvenile justice board found the minor guilty. Being under the age of eighteen, the minor was transferred to a rehabilitation institution for three years following the horrific act. The minor was released after completing three years, and due to security reason he was sent to secret location. The identity of minor was never revealed despite the demand of public for revelation. Given the horrific nature of the act, the public had requested that the juvenile rapist face an adult trial. He was never convicted as an adult, though. Later, the potential of booking minors as adults in the event of a horrific crime surfaced as a result of the public outrage. The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2015 was subsequently approved, allowing minors who are between the ages of 16 and 18 and who have committed serious crimes to face adult trials.
Another high profile case that has happened is the Porsche case of Pune, 2024. Under the influence of drinking, minor started heading home in his father’s unregistered Porsche. He lost control of the automobile as it was travelling in high speed and collided with a motorbike, killing two victims, one of the victims who was driving subsequently passed away at a hospital from his wounds, while, the pillion rider, died instantly. The juvenile was granted bail by the Juvenile Justice Board with the conditions that he must work with Yerwada Police for fifteen days, submit a 300-word essay about traffic accidents, get treatment for his alcohol addiction, and attend counselling sessions. The action was enough to trigger outrage among public and a question mark arises again at law and justice. The minor was booked under Section 304A (caused death by negligence) in the Pune accident and faced maximum of two-year jail sentence[Section 106 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) addresses causing death by negligence and is comparable to Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC)].
Laws related to Juvenile in India
The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015[4]
After the rape and murder of a female paramedical intern , there was a public outcry to bring changes into the existing law. The committee was constituted, which was headed by J.S. Verma, in order to outline the deficiencies in the existing criminal law. Though the committee rejected the lowering of age, it demanded to reform the existing juvenile justice and welfare system. Further, it recommended the proper implementation of existing law. But instead of following the advice, the government introduced the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (also known as the “2015 Act”), which had the dual goals of safeguarding victim rights and establishing standards of deterrence for young offenders. In addition to making a distinction between minor, severe, and heinous offences, the 2015 Act suggests treating juvenile offenders who commit “heinous offences” between the ages of sixteen and eighteen as adults and prosecuting them in adult court systems. The statute holds minors between the ages of 16 and 18 responsible for their conduct and provides appropriate punishments for violent crimes like rape and murder by allowing them to be prosecuted as adults. The act is applicable to minor in need of care and minor in collision with law. Each district across the nation will be home to two organisations: the Child Welfare Committee and the Juvenile Justice Board.
Adoption and reintegration processes and decisions involving children who are deemed to be in “need of care and protection” are within the purview of the Child Welfare Committee whereas the Juvenile Justice Board, which is made up of two social workers and a magistrate, hears cases involving minors accused of rape. To ascertain the case’s facts and evaluate the circumstances surrounding the crime, the board launches an investigation. It considers the minor’s age, mental and physical capabilities, and background. Privacy and confidentiality are crucial components of the legal system. Since the proceedings are being done on camera, they are being held in secret and are not available to the general public. This ensures that the juvenile’s name and privacy are protected and does not adversely affect their chances. The juvenile’s reform and rehabilitation are the Juvenile Justice Board’s main priorities.
Criminal Law (Amendment Act)
Criminal Law (Amendment Act) passed on March 19, 2013[5], as it confirmed that minors between the ages of 16 and 18 would face adult trials and punishments for heinous and violent murders and rapes. This prevented them from getting away with committing crimes they might have committed on purpose. 2018 saw more amendments to the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 2013, leading to the passage of the Criminal Law (Amendment Act) of 2018.[6]
Is it Appropriate for Juveniles to Face Adult Trials for Serious Crimes?
When we examine the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 criticism, according to the 2015 Act’s proposed structure, a juvenile who commits a serious crime is likely as mature as an adult and does not require the particular care that minors in India’s juvenile justice system get. According to the paper named Juvenile Maturity and Heinous Crimes: a re-look at Juvenile Justice Policy in India , research in developmental psychology demonstrates that the severity of the offence is not a reliable indicator of the child’s maturity, suggesting that the Board’s assessment of maturity is based on a faulty standard. It states that neuroscience research, a child over sixteen has a cognitive ability comparable to that of an adult, but their psychosocial maturity is not. It says that in order to constitute accurate judgment , there should be both cognitive ability and psychosocial maturity since by having cognitive ability ,a child might know killing is wrong but might stay unsure regarding what actually killing is or why killing is wrong.
Additionally the paper suggests that psychological research repeatedly shows that youngsters are more likely than adults to base judgments largely on emotions like anger or fear rather than logic or reason. Emotion only plays a more significant role in stressful circumstances. Important processes including mood regulation, impulse control, planning, thinking, and judgment are all carried out by the prefrontal cortex. Therefore, the prefrontal cortex is the foundation of reason, regulating a person’s propensity for impulsive action. Adolescence is a time of growth for the prefrontal brain. Scientific study indicates that teenagers prefer to use the amygdala, a region of the brain, while making decisions since they lack a functional prefrontal cortex. The amygdala is the brain region responsible for impulsive and violent conduct.[7]
On the contrary, in Nirbhaya case, it was hoped that the behavior of minor would change for the better. But, reports had something else to say, since the minor shared a cell with another minor connected to the Delhi High Court a blast case in 2015, intelligence sources said, there was a suspicion that the minor had become radicalised. According to Nirbhaya’s father, the police had stated that he had become street smart and had learnt to take advantage of the system. Thus, it is an instance where the behavior of the minor did not improve. It is one of the hurdles when it comes to reform a minor who has committed an evil act, to make minor a lawful member of the society especially when there is heinous crime.
Laws at the Global Level
According to UK law, minors, particularly those under 15, should have their cases adjudicated in the Youth Court wherever feasible, with serious matters being reserved for Crown Court trials. It distinguishes between first-time offenders under 12 and those between the ages of 12 and 14.
A person under the age of eighteen who is found guilty of a severe offence may receive a sentence that does not exceed the maximum term of imprisonment for adults under the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act, 2000. This also carries a life sentence.[8]
In Canada, The Youth Criminal Justice Act of 2002 established criminal justice systems for youth aged 12 to 18. Special rules under this legislation apply to minors who commit “serious offences” that carry sentences of more than five years in jail. It describes what constitutes “serious violent offences,” including attempted murder, manslaughter, aggravated sexual assault, and first- and second-degree murder. When it comes to severe and dangerous offences, the maximum penalty that may be given to an adult for the same offence cannot be exceeded. [9]
When we talk about US, in the state of California, individuals who are above 14 years old may face adult trials for offences including murder, rape, or robbery. The age of juvenility in New York is set at sixteen. This allows juvenile offenders to be prosecuted as adults.
For significant offences, a judge may decide to forego jurisdiction and move a matter to the adult criminal courts.
Conclusion
The juvenile justice act of 2015 is one of the judiciary’s most significant moves in the rapidly changing Indian child protection system. It is an essential step in making sure that society gives children who require care and protection the attention they deserve while serving the justice that society needs. It has received both praise and condemnation at the same time, and within that space, there is ongoing discussion over whether minors should be convicted as adults. The topic of discussion always shifts to a fresh case involving a minor’s horrific crime.
[1] https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/delhi/juvenile-crime-rate-highest-in-delhi-last-year-ncrb-data-9056140/
[2] https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/delhi/juvenile-crime-rate-highest-in-delhi-last-year-ncrb-data-9056140/
[3] https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/heart-of-darkness-major-crimes-by-minors-shoot-up/articleshow/105486240.cms
[4] The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, No.2 of 2015 ,(Ind.)
[5] Criminal Law (Amendment Act) , No. 13 of 2013, (Ind.)
[6] Criminal Law (Amendment Act) , No. 22 of 2018, (Ind.)
[7] https://docs.manupatra.in/newsline/articles/Upload/B2ED7DC9-B6A8-4780-8A9C-C015A5C48C71.pdf
[8] https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/overarching-guides/magistrates-court/item/sentencing-children-and-young-people/
[9] https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/Y-1.5/FullText.html
