ANALYSIS OF JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM IN INDIA WITH

OTHER COUNTRIES.
S.No Criteria India Japan South Africa International Guidelines
(Developed) (Developing) (Conventions on the Rights of the Child)
1. Governing Acts i. Juvenile Justice Juvenile law, 1949 Child Justice Act, 2000 i. United Nations Guidelines for the
(Care and (amended in 2000,2007, Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency
Protection) Act, 2008) (The Riyadh Guidelines)
2000 [as amended in ii. United Nations Standard Minimum
2006 and 2011] Rules for the Administration of Juvenile
ii. Juvenile Justice Justice ("The Beijing Rules")
(Care and Protection
of Children) Rules,
2007
iii. Indian Penal Code,
1860

2. Age of Criminal i. The Indian Penal There are 3 categories of i. Age of criminal i. In those legal systems recognizing the
Responsibility Code sets the children and persons that responsibility is 14 years concept of the age of criminal
minimum age of the Act applies to: or older. responsibility for juveniles, the
i. Children below 10 ii. Treatment of cases of beginning of that age shall not be fixed
criminal
years at the time of delinquent children under at too low an age level, bearing in mind
responsibility at 7 the commission of the 14, therefore, is in the facts of emotional, mental and
years under Section offence – section 9 accordance with intellectual maturity. The minimum age
82 (the doli incapax sets out procedures educational and welfare of criminal responsibility differs widely
ii. provision) - “Nothing that apply to children perspectives. Children owing to history and culture.
is an offence which is under 10 years of age under fourteen years old, ii. The modern approach would be to
done by a child under who have committed however, are handled consider whether a child can live up to
a crime. primarily by the child the moral and psychological
 seven years of age.” ii. Children aged 10 guidance centre, as components of criminal responsibility;
iii. Section 83 of the years and older but provided by the Child that is, whether a child, by virtue of her
Code specifies the younger than 18 years Welfare Law, when they or his individual discernment and
at the time of arrest or have committed acts, understanding, can be held responsible
age within which
when the summons or which, if committed by a for essentially antisocial behaviour.
children are presumed written notice was person aged fourteen or iii. If the age of criminal responsibility is
doli incapax unless served on them. over, would constitute a fixed too low or if there is no lower age
the prosecution iii. Persons who are 18 crime. limit at all, the notion of responsibility
proves otherwise. years or older but would become meaningless. In general,
iv. This section states, under 21 years of age there is a close relationship between the
“Nothing is an and who committed notion of responsibility for delinquent or
an offence when criminal behaviour and other social
offence which is done
under 18 years of age rights and responsibilities (such as
by a child above – Prosecutions will marital status, civil majority, etc.).
seven years of age issue directives on Efforts should therefore be made to
and under twelve, how this section is to agree on a reasonable lowest age limit
who has not attained be applied in practice. that is applicable internationally.
sufficient maturity of
understanding to
judge of the nature
and consequences of
his conduct on that
occasion.
v. ADD 2013 CLAUSE
3. Punishment i. There is no concept of i. The judge may make i. Based on the severity of i. Capital punishment shall not be
punishment in the one of the following the offence, a child may imposed for any crime committed by
Juvenile Justice Act. decisions: be placed in a child and juveniles.
ii. Juveniles shall not be subject to
The law provides for  to dismiss the youth care centre. If a
corporal punishment.
different kinds of case; child is 14 or older, he / iii. The provision prohibiting capital
orders that may be  to refer the case she may be placed in a punishment in rule 17.2 is in
 passed by the to the governor of the specified prison. accordance with article 6, paragraph 5,
Juvenile Justice prefecture or the chief ii. Section 29 deals with of the International Covenant on Civil
Board dealing with of the child guidance detention of a child in a and Political Rights.
iv. Some essential protections covering
offences committed centre; child and youth care
juvenile offenders in institutions are
by children below the  to place the centre and provides that
contained in the Standard Minimum
age of 18 years. juvenile under any child charged with
Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners
ii. These include: probation, a support any offence can be
(accommodation, architecture,
• Allow the juvenile to facility, or a juvenile detained in these
bedding, clothing, complaints and
go home after advice. training school; and facilities.
requests, contact with the outside
 to refer the case iii. In deciding whether to
world, food, medical care, religious
• Direct the juvenile to to the public place the child in a child
service, separation of ages, staffing,
participate in group prosecutor. The last and youth care the
work, etc.) as are provisions
counselling. decision can be made presiding officer, in
concerning punishment and discipline,
• Order the juvenile to when the juvenile is terms of section 29(2)
and restraint for dangerous offenders.
perform community fourteen years old or must take the following
It would not be appropriate to modify
service. over at the time of the factors into account:
those Standard Minimum Rules
• Order the parent or criminal acts and when • The age and maturity of
according to the particular
the juvenile himself to the judge finds it is the child;
characteristics of institutions for
pay a fine. appropriate for the •The seriousness of the
juvenile offenders within the scope of
• Direct to be released juvenile to be treated offence in question;
the Standard Minimum Rules for the
on probation of good under the regular • The risk that the child
Administration of Juvenile Justice.
conduct. criminal procedure. may be a danger to
• Directing to be sent ii. As a general rule, himself, herself or to any
to a special home when the juvenile is other person or child in the
subject to a maximum sixteen years old or child and youth care
period of three years over and has caused centre;
irrespective of the death by an act done • The appropriateness of
nature of offence with criminal intent, the the level of security of the
 committed. court refers him or her child and youth care centre
iii. The Board shall to the public prosecutor. differs according to the
obtain & consider the iii. When the court seriousness of the offence
finding of social chooses decision (3), allegedly committed by
investigation report the juvenile may file an the child.
(SIR) while making its appeal of the case to the iii. Section 30 deals with
order. higher court. detention of a child in
iv. No juvenile found prison awaiting trial and
guilty of committing an provides in section 30(1)
offence can be that a presiding officer may
sentenced to death or only send children to prison
life imprisonment. No awaiting trial if:
juvenile found guilty of
committing a crime can •The child is 14 years or
be committed to prison older and charged with a
in default of payment of Schedule 3 offence.
fine or in default of However, in terms of
furnishing security. section 30(5) a presiding
v. A child in conflict officer can send a child 14
with the law can also be years or older charged with
treated as a child in a Schedule 1 or 2 offence to
need of care and prison awaiting trial if, in
protection in certain addition to all the factors
cases such as in the case listed in section 30(1) and
of a child in the 7-12 subsection 3, there are
years age group caught substantial and compelling
for a petty offence or in reasons to do so, and these
the case of a first-time reasons must be placed on
offender. In such cases the record; The detention is
the child will be necessary in the interests of
transferred to the Child the administration of justice
Welfare Committee for or the safety or protection
care, protection and of the public or the child or
rehabilitation. another child in detention;
• There is a likelihood that
the child, if convicted,
could be sentenced to
imprisonment; and
• An application for bail
has been postponed or
refused or the child has not
complied with bail
conditions once granted.
iv. Broadly speaking,
Schedule 1 contains minor
offences, Schedule 2 more
serious offences and
Schedule 3 the most
serious offences.
United States of America:
Governing Acts:
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act ( JJDPA-1974) In 2002, the Act was reauthorized.
Age of criminal responsibility:
The lowest age is six, in North Carolina. Several states have no set standard, and thus rely on the common law age of seven.
Punishment
i. On June 25, 2012, the US Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional the mandatory sentence of life without the possibility of parole (LWOP) for
crimes committed by juveniles. The ruling did not specify whether it applied retroactively to those in prisons or to future juvenile felons. The
court banned only mandatory life sentences without parole for those under age 18 convicted of murder; it did not completely banish life (with
parole) sentences for such convicts.
ii. In most States, cases referred to juvenile court that meet certain criteria may be transferred to criminal court upon the authorization of the
juvenile court judge. This mechanism is known as "judicial waiver," since the judge is "waiving" the juvenile court's jurisdiction and giving
the case over to the criminal system.
iii. Judicial Waiver Under judicial waiver laws, the case originates in juvenile court. Under certain circumstances, the juvenile court judge has
the authority to waive juvenile court jurisdiction and transfer the case to criminal court. State statutes vary in how much guidance they
provide judges on the criteria used in determining if a youth’s case should be transferred. Some states call the process “certification,”
“remand,” or “bind over for criminal prosecution.” Others “transfer” or “decline jurisdiction.” Almost all states have judicial waiver
provisions which is the most traditional and common transfer and waiver provision.
iv. Age of Juvenile Court Jurisdiction These laws determine the age of adulthood for criminal justice purposes. They effectively remove certain
age groups from the juvenile court control for all infractions, whether violent or nonviolent, and place them within the adult court jurisdiction.
Thirteen states have defined the age of juvenile court jurisdiction as below the generally accepted age of 18 years old.
v. Transfer and Waiver Provisions These laws allow young people to be prosecuted in adult courts if they are accused of committing certain
crimes. A variety of mechanisms exist by which a youth can be transferred to adult court. Most states have transfer provisions, but they vary
in how much authority they allow judges and prosecutors to exercise.
vi. Prosecutorial Waiver These laws grant prosecutors discretion to file cases against young people in either juvenile or adult court. Such
provisions are also known as “concur rent jurisdiction,” “prosecutorial discretion,” or “direct file.” Fifteen states have concurrent jurisdiction
 provisions. Reverse Waiver This is a mechanism to allow youth whose cases are being prosecuted in adult court to be transferred back down
to the juvenile court system under certain circumstances. Half of the states have reverse waiver provisions.
vii. Statutory or Legislative Exclusion - These laws exclude certain youth from juvenile court jurisdiction entirely by requiring particular types of
cases to originate in criminal rather than juvenile court. More than half of the states have statutory exclusion laws on the books.
viii. Blended Sentencing - These laws allow juvenile or adult courts to choose between juvenile and adult correctional sanctions in sentencing
certain youth. Courts often will combine a juvenile sentence with a suspended adult sentence, which allows the youth to remain in the juvenile
justice system as long as he or she is well behaved. Half of the states have laws allowing blended sentencing in some cases.