This document provides a critical evaluation of the proposed Juvenile Justice Amendment Bill of 2014 in India. It discusses the bill's constitutional basis, history of juvenile justice legislation in India, objectives of the bill, key highlights and amendments. Some of the amendments discussed include expanding the definition of a juvenile, amendments to the juvenile justice board and procedures for children in conflict with the law. The document also examines recent related judicial interventions and concludes with suggestions that the bill needs further review to balance welfare and justice considerations for juveniles.

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

2. CRITICALLY
EVALUATE THE
JUVENILE JUSTICE
AMENDMENT
PROPOSED BILL
2014

4. 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.

5. I. Constitutional Basis OF JUVENILE
JUSTICE LESGISLATION

6. 15(3)
JUVENILE
JUSTICE
ACT
39(e) 39(f)

7. ii. History of juvenile justice legislation.

8. 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

9. III. International scenario.

10. 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.

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

12. BACKGROUND OF THE JUVENILE
JUSTICE PROPOSED AMENDMENT BILL –
2014.

13. 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

14. IV. Objectives of the Bill.

15. 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.

16. V. Highlights of the proposed Bill.

17. 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.

18. VI. Amendment with regard to Juvenile
Justice Board.

19. 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.

20. vii. Amendment related to child in conflict with
law.

21. 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.

22. viii. recent Judicial interventions.

23. “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”.

24.  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)

25. IX. Amendment related with c w c.

26. 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.

27. X. Conclusions & Suggestions.

28. 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.

30. Remember !!!

31. Thank you…!!! 