Juvenile Justice System –For Juvenile Offenders below the Age of Sixteen ‘16’ – An Indian Perspective

Abstract

The court’s duty and responsibility lies in the determination of ages of people who commit or are involved in crimes. The determination aims to discern whether or not the individual is a juvenile. Also, court’s specifications demonstrate that children who are very young ought not to be imprisoned. From the guidelines in the JJ Act of 1986, juveniles constitute girls aged below 18 and boys aged below 16. The 200 Act of Care and Protection suggests that the difference in the ages of boys and girls categorized as juveniles is worth eliminating. Hence, the Act’s sections 2(12) and 2(35) treat 18 as the year that determines whether or not one is a juvenile. From the 2015 Act 2(13) regarding the conflict of children with the law, it reflects juveniles perceived to have committed crimes, yet they have not attained the age of 18. In such a case, the role of the court is expected to involve determining the offender’s age based on certain documents, upon which it would discern if the offender is a juvenile. The implication is that the role of inquiry lies in verifying the documents at hand in court, especially when the case is pending. In the wake of this controversy, however, the 2015 Juvenile Justice Act has addressed the dilemma by ensuring that children are specifically referred to as those who, at the time of offence, are aged 18 or above. Despite this provision, many judgments continue to contravene the provision, reflecting an inconclusive debate.