WELCOME

I am RAHEEMA.A.V second year LLM student of Government Law College, Thrissur

CRITICALLY EVALUATE

THE JUVENILE JUSTICE

AMENDMENT

PROPOSED BILL 2014

Topics to be discussed :-

I. Constitutional Basis II. History of juvenile justice legislation.III. International scenario.IV. Objectives of the Bill.V. Highlights of the proposed Bill.VI. Amendment with regard to Juvenile Justice

Board.VII. Amendment related to child in conflict with

law.VIII. Judicial interventions.IX. Amendment related with c w c.X. Conclusions & Suggestions.

I. Constitutional Basis OF JUVENILE JUSTICE LESGISLATION

15(3)

39(e) 39(f)

JUVENILE JUSTICE

ACT

ii. History of juvenile justice legislation.

JUVENILE JUSTICE ACT - 1986

JUVENILE JUSTICE (CARE &

PROTECTION) ACT -

2000

LAST JUVENILE JUSTICE (CARE &

PROTECTION) RULES

2007

JUVENILE JUSTICE (CARE &

PROTECTION)

AMENDMENT ACT – 2006

+ 2010

III. International scenario.

1) THE STANDARD MINIMUM RULES FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUVENILE JUSTICE – 1985

(BEIJING RULES)2) THE CONVENTION ON THE RIGHTS OF

CHILD – 1989.3) UN GUIDELINES FOR THE PREVENTION OF

JUVENILE DELINQUENCY – 1990. (RIYADH GUIDELINES).4) UN RULES FOR THE PROTECTION OF

JUVENILE DEPRIVED OF THEIR LIBERTY – 1990.

5) SAARC CONVENTION ON REGIONAL ARRANGEMENT FOR PROMOTION OF CHILD WELFARE 2002.

JUVENILE JUSTICE (CARE & PROTECTION) PROPOSED AMENDMENT BILL - 2014

BACKGROUND OF THE JUVENILE JUSTICE

PROPOSED AMENDMENT BILL – 2014.

Increase in reported incidents of abuse of children in institutions families and communities.

Inadequate facilities, quality of care and rehabilitation measures in homes.

Delay in various processes under the act such as decisions by CWCs and JJBs leading to high pendency of cases.

Delay and complication in adoption process.

Inadequate provisions to deal with offences against children.

Implement Provisions related to juveniles in conflict with law inthe age group of 16-18years.

Delhi gang rape case

IV. Objectives of the Bill.

To ensure that every child enjoy his rights.

To stay on protection and care of children without facing harassment or abuse.

To ensure swiftly and productively reintegrated into the society in case he id found to be in conflict with law.

To streamlining the central adoption resource agency.

V. Highlights of the proposed Bill.

The bill contains 111 Sections.

In the entire proposed bill the word JUVENILE had been removed and replaced with CHILD and hence either the term juvenile has to be defined or the title of the Bill ought to be changed.

The bill included so many new terms to the definition clause like foster care, open shelter, aftercare, child friendly, child legally free for adoption etc...those things are welcomed.

The word Missing child is not defined in the definition clause.

The act is silent about the victims of child marriage, child labour and their rehabilitation.

VI. Amendment with regard to Juvenile Justice

Board.

Section 5 of the Bill dealing with juvenile justice board-board consist of metropolitan magistrate or a judicial magistrate as the case may be, not being chief metropolitan magistrate or chief judicial magistrate.

The Bill not mentioned about the special knowledge of magistrate in child psychology or child welfare.

vii. Amendment related to child in conflict with law.

Section 13 of the Bill is stating about Inquiry by Board regarding Child In Conflict With Law. After that this provision leads to high pendency of cases.

Conflict between the sections 17(1) & 4 (14). It propounds a new term principle of fresh test it means All past records of any child under the juvenile justice system should be erased.

Section 17(3) of the Bill provides that after the inquiry under sub section (1) or(2) of section 14( Heinous crimes committed by child in the age group of 16 to 18)pass an order to transfer the case to the court having jurisdiction over such offence.

It must be born in mind that children between 16 to 18 years are the most vulnerable and need special care and protection. So that the law that deals with the conviction of these children must be handled carefully.

viii. recent Judicial interventions.

“I quote the judgment of supreme court in Sali bali v. Union of India reported in 2013 all India reporter page no 3743,Ofcourse exceptions are there where a child(16-18)may have developed criminal propensities which would make it virtually impossible for him/her to be reintegrated in to the mainstream of society. But such examples are not make any change in thinking since it is probably better to try and reintegrate children with criminal propensities into mainstream of the society rather than to allow them to develop into hardened criminals which is not well for the future”.

SAURABH PRAKASH V. UNION OF INDIA (WP(C) NO: 14 OF 2013)

VINAY K SHARMA V. UNION OF INDIA (WP(C) NO: 90 OF 2013)

KRISHNA DEO PRASAD V. UNION OF INDIA (WP (C) NO: 85 OF 2013)

KAMAL KUMAR PANDEY & SUKUMAR V. UNION OF INDIA

(WP (C) NO: 42 OF 2013)

HEMA SAHU V. UNION OF INDIA ( WP (C) NO: 182 OF 2013)

IX. Amendment related with c w c.

The Bill amended as the members of the committee shall consist of deputy commissioner or district magistrate as the chair person. This amendment have both merit and demerit.

In one aspect it is welcomed, because the Bill provides that the committee shall function as a bench of magistrate, so inclusion of DM will make it functions more effective.

But in another aspects the proposal should not be accepted as it would be impossible for the DM and DC to concentrate on the care and protection of children with his hectic schedule.

The Section newly included the functions and responsibilities of committee it also an effective tool.

Amendment in provision related to procedure in relation to children in need of care and protection also welcomed.

Amendment to adoption provision also effective and welcomed.

Amendment as to increasing of penalty for offence against children are also a good step.

X. Conclusions & Suggestions.

The most glaring need was to address the deplorable conditions of many child care facilities.

There is no need to amend the entire JJ ACT 2000.

The new proposed amendment as to the transfer of case to normal court push lot of children into the adult category merely on the basis of one allegation.

Special court can establish to deal with heinous offence committed by child.

The division as to heinous offence committed by the child in the age group of 16-18 can avoid.

The juvenile legislation in India has attempted to balance welfarism and justice. But in this bill more concentration is on the area of child conflict with law.

This step sounds hypocritical and will create more confusion than any solution.

QUESTIONS

Remember !!!

Thank you…!!!