HIMACHAL PRADESH NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, SHIMLA

APPLICABILTY OF PRINCIPLE OF MENS REA IN CASE OF

CHILDREN

SUBJECT: OFFENCES AGAINST CHILD & WOMEN

CLASS: B.B.A.LL.B.

SEMESTER: NINTH

SUBMITTED TO:

Dr. Ruchi Gupta

(Assistant Professor of Law)

HPNLU, Shimla.

SUBMITTED BY:

Shitanshu Saklani
Roll Number: 1120171810

Page | 1
Table of Contents
List of Cases:...............................................................................................................................................3
Research Methodology:...............................................................................................................................3
Key Research Questions:.............................................................................................................................3
Introduction.................................................................................................................................................4
In Indian Penal Code (IPC), the significance of word ‘Mens Rea’ can be traced in two ways:...................5
Understanding the Implication of Mens Rea...............................................................................................5
Essentials of Mens Rea................................................................................................................................6
What is section 82, Indian Penal Code, 1860?(Also: what is doli incapax in ipc?)......................................6
Case laws for Section 83 or Partial Incapax................................................................................................9
JUVENILE CRIME: DELINQUENCY OR VULNERABLE TO DELINQUENCY...............................13
UNDERSTANDING THE JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM....................................................................14
CONCLUSION.............................................................................................................................................19

Page | 2
List of Cases:
 Marsh v. Loader, (1863) 14 CBNS 535
 Krishna Bhagwan v. State of Bihar, 1989 SCC OnLine Pat 89
 Hiralal Gupta v. State of Bihar, 2006 SCC OnLine Pat 964
 Kakoo v. State of H.P., (1976) 2 SCC 215
 R v Lmw [1999] NSWSC 1111

Research Methodology:
The methodology adopted is doctrinal study of the topic. Research is library and web sources
based. No access to specialist collections and access to comparative or historical materials is
required.

Key Research Questions:

 Why does infancy act as a defence?
 what is doli incapax in ipc?
 What is partially incapex?
 Can children never be charged with crimes?

Page | 3
Introduction
Earlier in the 12th century Mens Rea was not an element of crime. The wrongdoers used to get
punished regardless the fact that whether the act done was intentional or not. The concept of
Mens Rea was first introduced in the 17th century along with the Latin maxim ‘actus reus non
facit reum, nisi mens sit rea’ which means ‘there can be no crime without a guilty mind’. This
maxim cleared the conflict that a crime can only be said to be constituted where the action was
done in accordance of a guilty intention.

Later the concept of Mens Rea was taken from the English law and was incorporated in the
Indian criminal laws at the time of British era. A draft of the Indian Penal Code of 1860 was
prepared by Lord Macaulay and was enacted in 6th October, 1860. Though Mens Rea originally
is a part of English Law but it was included with after modifying and systematically arranging it
accordingly, so that it could suit the circumstances of the British India. Mr M.C Setalvad said
that “Basic English notions underlie most of the crimes defined in the code but also these notions
were simplified and modified to adapt to the Indian conditions.”

Mens Rea or the mental element of crime is a very important part of criminal law in India as well
as other countries. Most laws in India contain the element of guilty mind so as to make an act by
a person criminally liable for punishment. Mens Rea is the whole essence of crime. Without
having an intention to act in a manner that it causes harm to person or property then in front of
law it is not a crime. The presence of Mens Rea implies that the wrongdoer had the ability to
choose between what is good and what is not.

Page | 4
In Indian Penal Code (IPC), the significance of word ‘Mens Rea’ can be traced in two ways:
1. All the definitions of crime are carefully defined with focus on showing the evil intention
for doing the act. Usage of words like – intentionally, fraudulently, knowingly,
voluntarily etc. emphasis the presence of Doctrine of Mens Rea.
2. In Chapter IV- ‘General Exceptions’, which is based on that no action would lie but
without guilty mind.

Understanding the Implication of Mens Rea

For the better understanding of the Concept of Mens Rea it is necessary to understand the
meaning of certain words that are often used as synonyms for Mens Rea.

1) Intention: It is the state of mind of the person doing the crime. It can be proved when
the defendant can foresee virtually that the consequences of the action of the person is
going to kill, cause grievous injury or any other prohibited harm to them.
2) Motive: A motive in criminal law is the cause that moves people to induce into a
certain action. Motive is not a basic element of crime but it is mostly looked into
while investigation of a criminal case. Motive is the reason of any act, hence, even if
motive was good but the act was wrong then criminal liability may arise.
3) Knowledge: the word knowledge or knowingly is used in certain places in IPC to
denote Mens Rea. It can be seen from two sides, firstly a person had knowledge and
act in a wrongful manner and secondly they had knowledge about the bad
consequences and chose not to act hence resulting in a wrongful act. Both can be
understood as a part of Mens Rea and are punishable.
4) Negligence: It cannot be used as a synonym for Mens Rea but while looking for
guilty intent in any criminal case this aspect is also covered. Negligence is the lack of
attention or due care that a reasonable or prudent person may have while performing
any task. For a negligent act to turn into criminal negligence its degree shall be high
enough to cause criminal liability.
5) Voluntarily: This word is used in the code to show that the person doing an act had
the knowledge of what they are doing and had full control of their actions.

Page | 5
 Voluntarily can be used to show intention as well. It is used only because it has more
extended meaning than ‘intentionally.’

Essentials of Mens Rea

Mens Rea is constructed from a person’s thought process, their motive and intention.

Motive and intention are two separate ideas. Motive is the reason behind the act whereas
intention is a person’s state of mind and willingness to break the law.

Presence of both Motive and Intention facilitates the prosecution of a crime but motive is not
a necessary element for conviction.

Intention, whereas, on the other hand is more important than motive. It is a subjective fact
which is required by the criminal law by the prosecution.

Example: A person takes another person’s bike with them in good faith but it was taken
without consent. This act will be considered as theft.

What is section 82, Indian Penal Code, 1860?(Also: what is doli incapax in ipc?)
Section 82 of IPC: An act of a child under seven years of age.—Nothing is an offense which
is done by a child under seven years of age.

Suppose a child who is below seven years of age, has a dangerous weapon in his hand,
mistakenly triggers it and causes the death of any person on the opposite side. In such a case, that
child will not be liable by this Section.

‘A’ an adult in order to kill ‘B’, instigates a child ‘C’ of below 7 years to do an act which causes
B’s death. Here, the child will not be liable for any crime as he is a “doli incapax”. However, A
will be held liable for murder of B.

‘X’ an adult instigates a child ‘Y of 7 years to burn a dwelling house. Y without knowing the
consequences of his actions burns the house. Here Y cannot be held liable under this section.

Therefore, It may be analyzed that a child below 7 years of age is absolutely immune to criminal
liability and cannot be guilty of an offense under the Indian penal code.

Page | 6
Merely the evidence of that age would be a definite proof of the innocent child and would “ipso
facto” (Latin phrase: “by the fact itself”) be an answer to any charge against that child.

While the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012 (POCSO) does not include
such a provision, the Indian Penal Code exemptions would apply for any POCSO offenses as
well.

Relevant Case:

In Marsh v. Loader1, the defendant caught a child stealing a piece of wood from his premises
and was given in custody. Since he was below the age of 7 years, he was discharged.

Why does infancy act as a defence?

In these cases, the situation is based on the understanding that a child below the age of 7 years
i.e. during infancy or in the state of babyhood, they do not have the mental ability to understand
the nature and consequences of their actions and thus lacks the ability to form the requisite guilty
mind or any intention.

It must be noted that such an age was not arrived on the basis of any understanding of child
psychology, but is “simply an expression of public policy”, “a practical working method ”, and
not necessarily on “any observable fact.”

Since Doli incapex was already an established doctrine in English and Roman law, we can quite
surely say IPC has borrowed the concept from there, and hence no express reasoning of the ‘7
years’ mark can be traced.

These children get defense as an “absolute immunity”. If a child crosses the age of 7 and
commits the crime then the court will take necessary action such as mandatory therapy
sessions based on that child’s maturity of understanding and capacity to commit a crime. It is
also called a case of ‘qualified immunity’ and falls under section 83 of the Indian Penal Code.

Neuroscience suggests that the pre-frontal cortex (responsible for executive functions, such as
problem-solving, planning, and decision making) is only fully developed after the age of 24. At 7

1
(1863) 14 CBNS 535
Page | 7
years old, our ability to fully comprehend the impact of our actions is simply not present. This
could possibly give reason to the 7 years of age bar fixed.

What if the child is above 7 years but below twelve years of age? (What is partially incapex?)

Section 83 in The Indian Penal Code: Act of a child above seven and under twelve of
immature understanding.—Nothing is an offense which is done by a child above seven
years of age and under twelve, who has not attained sufficient maturity of understanding to
judge of the nature and consequences of his conduct on that occasion.

Ingredients:

1) An Act is done by a child above 7 years but under 12 years of age.

2) The Child should not have attained sufficient maturity of understanding to judge the
nature and consequences of his conduct
3) The incapacity must exist at the time of the commission of an act.

In other words, when a child is above the age of 7 but is still under the age of 12 he enjoys
‘qualified immunity‘. This means if his actions prove that had a sufficient understanding of the
offence while he committed it, he can be prosecuted.

The test of sufficient knowledge depends on individual cases. For example, a child hiding
murder weapons after murder would indicate that he had sufficient understanding of the fact that
murder is an offence therefore, he shall be liable.

Can children never be charged with crimes?

In doli incapax under IPC, the presumption of section 83 is rebuttable, and the burden of
rebutting lies upon the defendant. A child between 7 to 12 years of age has the defence of ‘doli
incapax‘ if it is proved that the child didn’t have the maturity to understand the crime.

Basically, Between the age of 7 and 12, the CrPC provides for a presumption of innocence in
favor of children, but if the prosecution can prove and provide evidence for the contrary then the
child can be prosecuted.

Page | 8
But if the child is below 7 years then he or she enjoys absolute immunity and can in no
circumstances be held liable.

Case laws for Section 83 or Partial Incapax

1) In Krishna Bhagwan v. the State of Bihar 2, Patna High Court upheld that if a child
who is accused of an offense during the trial, has attained the age of seven years or at the
time of the decision the child has attained the age of seven years can be convicted if he
has the understanding knowledge of the offense committed by him.
2) In the case of Hiralal Gupta v. State of Bihar 3, an 11-year-old child quarreled with the
deceased and threatened to cut the deceased into pieces. The child picked up the knife
and actually stabbed the deceased to death. The defense under Section 83 of the Indian
Penal Code was pleaded. The trial court convicted the boy rejecting the defense because
the child’s words, gesture, assault, keeping a knife and ultimately stabbing the deceased
proved that the child had the knowledge and understanding of the consequences of his
actions. The Supreme Court upheld the decision of the High Court.
3) In Kakoo vs. The State Of Himachal Pradesh4, Kakoo who was of thirteen years had
committed rape on the child of 2 years and was sentenced to 4 years of rigorous
imprisonment by the trial court, and the high court upheld the decision. The defence
counsel pleaded defence under section 82 and 83 of the Indian Penal Code. This took
place in 1976 when laws for juvenile and child delinquents were not fully developed, and
Himachal Pradesh did not have any enactment in force at the time. The court, however,
stated, “taking into account all the circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that
the ends of justice will be served by reducing the sentence of the appellant to one year’s
rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rupees 2,000/-, and in default of payment of fine, to
suffer six months’ further rigorous imprisonment. The appellant shall be detained
separately from adult prisoners. He should preferably be detained in a Reformatory

2
1989 SCC OnLine Pat 89
3
2006 SCC OnLine Pat 964
4
(1976) 2 SCC 215
Page | 9
 School, if any, for the said period. The fine, if realized, shall be paid as compensation to
Shrimati Parmeshwari Devi, the mother of the victim baby.”

4) In the case of R v. LMW5, a 10-year-old boy, LMW, was charged with the manslaughter
of 6-year-old Corey Davis, who drowned on 2 March 1998. The defendant had dropped
Corey into the Georges River, knowing that Corey was unable to swim. The defendant
was found not guilty of manslaughter, as the jury supported the defence case that the
drowning of Corey had been ‘an act of bullying that went wrong’. This case raised the
issue of Doli incapax, which presumes any child aged 7-12 is incapable of criminal intent
unless proven otherwise.

“Children are fascinating; children are important-both very good reasons for
wanting to find out more about them.”
H. Rudolph Schaffer, Introducing Child Psychology

As a society, we are in agreement that children need special attention due to their young age,
developmental needs and evolving capacities. Another argument is that children are not merely
in a state of “becoming”, “evolving”, or in a “transition” stage to adulthood, but have their own
innate capacities and strengths. They are entitled to their own set of ‘rights’. The State,
community, and family are expected to provide optimal opportunities to facilitate each child’s
growth and development, and to ensure the fulfillment of his/her rights. Unfortunately, despite
these well meaning intentions, appropriate care and nurture elude large numbers of children in
India. A substantial number of children are growing up in an environment of chronic poverty,
neglect, abuse and exploitation. The reason for this can be found in the basic structure of
patriarchal society as well as in the inadequate State and societal commitment to seriously
address the vulnerabilities of children. The fall out of this situation is all around us:
malnourishment, school drop outs, discrimination against the girl child, child labour, street
children, child trafficking, children with disability, and child beggars. Adverse home and

5
[1999] NSWSC 1111
Page | 10
environmental conditions can have other impact too: children get into ‘at risk’ behaviours such
as addiction or crime.

In England, around the nineteenth century, four key categories of children were identified as
special child care concerns. They were: children of the street (“beggars, prostitutes etc”.),
young offenders, children at work and special groups such as children with disabilities,
abandoned children etc. In the twenty first century too these concerns continue to remain among
the key priority areas related to children worldwide. The Annual Report (2010- 2011) of the
Ministry of Women and Child Development, Government of India 6 outlines that India has the
largest child population in the world (around 19% of the world’s children). More than one third
of the country’s population, around 440 million, is below 18 years. It is estimated that around
170 million or 40 per cent of India’s children are vulnerable or experiencing difficult
circumstances characterized by their specific social, economic and geopolitical situations. The
Report endorses that all these children need special attention. Over the years the State has
introduced several policies, programmes and legislation to focus not only on the well being of all
children but especially to address the priority needs of the above mentioned large categories of
vulnerable and marginalized children.
Much before child rights became an integral part of national and international documents and
discourses, the Indian Constitution7 had specifically outlined provisions for children in critical
areas such as overall growth and development, education and protection from any form of abuse
and exploitation. India has comprehensive policy documents 8 and action plans9 for children.
India has also been a signatory to UN Conventions. Scott (2000:9) aptly comments, “Policy
makers view children as a very special class of citizens, a group whose unique traits and
circumstances warrant a different regulatory scheme from that which applies to the rest of us.
6
www.wcd.nic.in
7
Articles 14, 15, 15(3), 19(1) (a), 21, 21(A), 23, 24, 39(e) 39(f) of the Indian Constitution are significant for
children as they highlight equality, non discrimination, making special provisions for women and children,
and other safeguards
8
The National Policy for Children, 1974, the first comprehensive national policy on children was followed
by National Policy on Education, 1986, National Policy on Child Labour, 1987, National Nutrition Policy,
1993 etc.
9
The National Charter for Children, 2004 highlights areas of child protection, survival, life and liberty,
protection from economic exploitation and all forms of abuse.

Page | 11
These special protections are grounded firmly in a consistent account of what it means to be a
child.” While there are specific legislations to deal with different priority areas pertaining to
children, the Juvenile Justice system is the largest machinery in India to work with two
significant groups of vulnerable children: children without family or family support, and children
who allegedly commit offences.
IMPORTANT TERMS
In this project some legal terms has been used frequently so it is necessary to map out the
parameters of the terms that will be used often in later discussions. They are:

Children: All human beings (boys and girls) who have not completed eighteen years of age (as
per the international definition provided in Article 1 of the Convention on the Rights of the
Child)

Juvenile in Conflict with Law- This is a term given under the Juvenile Justice (Care and
Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (hereafter referred to as the Juvenile Justice Act) to all children
who have been apprehended (arrested) by the police for alleged offence charges. The children
have not completed eighteen years of age at the time of the alleged offence. Thus this term also
includes those persons who are apprehended after they have completed 18 years, but were less
than 18 years at the time of the alleged offence.

Offence - An illegal act or violation of any law committed by the juvenile in conflict with law
for which offence charges are levied.

Juvenile Justice System - This is not one single entity. Within the context of the juvenile in
conflict with law, the juvenile system comprises all those mandatory Institutions (Observation
Home and Special Home) and Bodies (Juvenile Justice Board) that have been exclusively set up
to work with the juvenile in conflict with law and implement the Juvenile Justice Act. The
juvenile justice system also includes those organisations that work with the juvenile justice
system as one of their responsibilities (police, public prosecutor who legally represent the police
case before the Juvenile Justice Board and the Free Legal Aid lawyer). Other voluntary
organizations, NGOs or individuals who work with children within the juvenile justice system
are also part of the system.

Page | 12
Observation Home- This is a children’s residential institution as mandated by the Juvenile
Justice Act. Juveniles in conflict with law are admitted into the Observation Home and stay there
till they are released on bail or through other Orders of the Juvenile Justice Board. The
Observation Home is a closed Institution. Children cannot leave without specific Orders of the
Juvenile Justice Board. Basic requirements of food, clothing, and shelter are met in the
Observation Home. There are a few opportunities for vocational training as well. The
Observation Home offers temporary stay till suitable Orders are passed).

Juvenile Justice Board: It is the mandated authority to deal with the cases of juveniles in
conflict with law. The Juvenile Justice Board is a three member bench comprising a Magistrate
and two social workers of which one is a woman. The Juvenile Justice Board takes all decisions
pertaining to the juvenile at all stages: the first production before the Board after being
apprehended by the police, bail, period of inquiry and closing of the case with the Final Order.

‘Juvenile crime’ or ‘juvenile offence’ is the term used to study children who commit a crime or
get apprehended on ‘offence charges’. Whenever we think of a child or a group of children, it
usually conjures up a benign image. Generally, children are viewed as “young”, “innocent” or
“helpless”. Children are considered dependent on adult care and protection. Their abuse or
exploitation evokes anger and/or sympathy. The image of ‘crime’ on the other hand is stark,
sordid, and one of harm being done. There is a fear factor too. Juxtaposing these two ‘images’ of
‘child’ and ‘crime’ and understanding ‘juvenile crime’ often becomes challenging. When the
media reports about heinous crimes being committed by children, there is public outrage and
anger. Questions are raised on the rationale for “treating” such children differently when the
safety of society itself is at stake. It becomes difficult to associate crime with child vulnerability.
It raises more uncomfortable questions than we would like to answer.

There are two strong positions on juvenile crime; the “get tough” approach vis-à-vis the
“supportive” approach towards children who commit crimes. The former approach is emphatic
that crime needs to be tackled punitively especially if it has been a serious violation of law. The
young age of the person involved cannot be a sole justification. The latter is equally strong in the
argument that children need to be viewed differently even when they transgress the law or are
involved in serious offences. While there have been debates about the cut off age for 'majority',
age of 'consent' etc, there is no debate on the need to create the 'distinction' between child and

Page | 13
adult. There have been a number of research studies and theoretical perspectives on children,
which assert that children need to be understood differently from adults. It is widely accepted
that young people require special care and protection up to a certain age. Their well being is the
responsibility of the family, society and the State.

JUVENILE CRIME: DELINQUENCY OR VULNERABLE TO DELINQUENCY

While juvenile crime may be individual in some cases, it is necessary to continue focusing on it
as a social problem. Freeman (1981) notes, “By personalizing causes, the social reality of trouble
can be astutely ignored…Individualization also depoliticizes”. In a study by Dabir and Nigudkar
(2005) on the status of the implementation of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of
Children) Act, 2000 within the State of Maharashtra, India, the magistrates identified four causes
of offence: poverty, unemployment, negative impact of the social environment and the family
atmosphere in general. Factors associated with poverty and lack of access to facilities and
resources is one of the major causes of juvenile offence. Child neglect and delinquency does not
happen in a vacuum. There are larger societal issues of deprivation and child rights violation that
require attention at the macro level.

The report of a thematic consultation for the United Nations Secretary-General’s study on
violence against children (2005) analyzes that key systemic issues for juvenile offence include:

1. The use of the justice system for children in need of care and protection; the criminalization of
normal, petty misbehavior, survival behaviors and status offences; and the criminalization of
children who are victims of abuse,

2. Violence in the home and dysfunctional families,

3. The failure of care and protection systems, including the lack of social support systems,
appropriate social policies and preventive programs,

4. Discrimination against vulnerable groups of children, including negative attitudes and

stigmatization of children based on race, gender, ethnicity etc, and

5. Social and economic conditions, particularly poverty and socio-economic inequalities.

Page | 14
UNDERSTANDING THE JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM
The United Nations Secretary-General’s report on “Rule of law and transitional justice in
conflictand post-conflict societies” (August 2004) defines “justice” as an ideal of accountability
and fairness in the protection, vindication of rights and the prevention and punishment of
wrongs. Justice implies regard for the rights of the accused, for the interests of victims and for
the wellbeing of society at large”. The juvenile justice system is the machinery specifically
created for juveniles in conflict with law; it could either function within the adult criminal justice
system or independently. It need not be a single entity. It is usually a large network of
institutions and groups that are involved in the delivery of juvenile justice (such as police,
Children’s Homes/Centers, Juvenile Courts/Panels/Boards, the concerned State Departments,
judiciary, governmental and non-governmental organizations). Some of the fundamental
principles of a juvenile justice system include humane treatment of children, creating a child-
centered system, provision of specialized services along with a multi disciplinary approach.
“Juvenile justice” can also refer to legislations, norms and standards of arrest, conditions of bail
and detention, procedures and judicial processes (from first entry of the juvenile to
reintegration), institutions and bodies specifically applicable to juvenile offenders. It also
includes efforts to address the root causes of offending behaviour and implement measures to
prevent such behavior (Juvenile Justice Training Manual, Penal Reform International and
UNICEF). The justice system comprises State-run law enforcement institutions (Observation
Home, Special Home, Juvenile Justice Board, Special Juvenile Police Unit (within the police),
Prosecution services, and legal aid). The non-State mechanisms include voluntary workers,
NGOs, academic centers, police/judicial training centres, and child related Commissions
established by the State.10

In different countries the juvenile justice system has evolved based on the legal mandates of the
country and societal realities. According to Butts, et al., (2005) intervening with young offenders
before they graduate to serious crime is a basic principle of the juvenile justice system. Creating
opportunities for the development of children and reducing their vulnerability is another key
objective. The United Nations ‘Committee on the Rights of the Child’ in their “General
Comment no. 10” (2007) asserts that “Children differ from adults in their physical and
psychological development, and their emotional and educational needs. Such differences

10
UN Common Approach to Justice for Children, 2008, http:www.unrol.org/doc

Page | 15
constitute the basis for the lesser culpability of children in conflict with the law. These and other
differences are the reasons for a separate juvenile justice system and require a different treatment
for children. In all decisions taken within the context of administration of juvenile justice the best
interests of the child should be a primary consideration”

History of Juvenile Justice Legislations in India since 1986 and their specific provisions:
1. Juvenile Justice Act 1986
 JJ Act was enacted in pursuance of the Beijing Rules 1985, prior to the CRC

 Definition of juvenile or child – 16 years for boys and 18 years for girls

 Children were categorized as delinquent juveniles and neglected juveniles

 Both categories of children were kept in an Observation Home together pending inquiry

 Juvenile Welfare Board was formed to deal with the neglected juveniles and the Juvenile Court
was the adjudicating authority for the delinquent juvenile

 The neglected juveniles were in the Juvenile Home and the delinquent juveniles to the Special
Home

The Government of India ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child in
1992 thereby making it expedient to adhere to the standards prescribed in the Convention.
Hence, the 1986 JJ Act had to be reviewed and changes had to be made in order to secure the
best interest of the child and focus on social re-integration of the child without resorting to
judiciary

The JJ Act 1986 was repealed and the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act
2000 was passed taking into consideration all the International standards prescribed as per the
Convention on the Rights of the Child, the Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of
Juvenile Justice, 1985 (Beijing Rules), The UN Guidelines for the Prevention of Juvenile

Page | 16
Delinquency called the Riyadh Guidelines, 1990 and the United Nations Rules for the Protection
of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty (1990)

2. The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Amendment Act, 2006
 The JJ Act 2000 was subsequently amended and hereafter referred to as the Principal Act
 The Amendment Act brought about 26 amendments which are in force
 This Act forms the legal system and framework for the care, protection, treatment and
rehabilitation of children of both categories

The Objective of the Act:

- To Lay Down A Legal Structure For The Juvenile Justice System In The Country
- To Provide A Special Approach To The Protection And Treatment Of Juveniles
- To outline the machinery and infrastructure required for the care, protection, treatment,
development and rehabilitation of juveniles
- To establish norms and standards for administration of juvenile justice
- To establish linkages and co-ordination between the formal system of juvenile justice and
voluntary efforts in the welfare of juveniles
- To constitute special offences in relation to juveniles and provide punishment.

Salient features of Juvenile Justice Act:

a) The Act known as ‘The Reformatory Act’ deals with two categories of children, namely
children in need of care and protection and children in conflict with the law.
b) The competent authority to deal with children in need of care and protection is the Child
Welfare Committee which constitutes a Chairperson and four other members, one of
whom at least should be a woman. Chapter IV of this Module would focus in detail about
Children in need of care and protection and the functioning of the CWC in rehabilitation
and disposition of cases.
c) Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) is the competent authority to deal with children in conflict
with law which comprises of three members. The Chairperson of the Board should be a
First Class Judicial Magistrate and two honorary social workers out of whom at least one

Page | 17
 should be a woman. Special provisions for children in conflict with law and the
responsibilities of the Board are discussed in detail in Chapter III of this Module.

2. The Act provides for the establishment of various kinds of Institutions such as
- Children’s Home for the reception of child in need of care and protection.
- Special Homes for the reception of child in conflict with law
- Observation Homes which are meant for the temporary reception of children during the
pendency of any inquiry.
- After-care Organizations which are meant for the purpose of taking care of children after they
have been discharged from Children’s Home or Special Homes.

The Ministry of Women and Child Development at New Delhi, the 26th day of October, notified
the Model Rules under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2000 and the
Amendment Act 2006 to be administered by the States for better implementation and
administration of the provisions of the Act in its true spirit and substance.

These rules called the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007 has come
into force on the date of its publication in the Official Gazette and these Rules will be conformed
to until the concerned State Government formulates Rules specific for the State with effect to
implementation of the JJ Act.

Page | 18
Page | 19
 CONCLUSION
Laws should be dynamic in nature and should change with the changing society.

It is a famous saying that whatever will not change with the changing time, will ultimately result
in failure and so stands for the law as well. Society is not static, it is dynamic. Its needs change
with time to survive. It is correct to reform and rehabilitate a child in conflict with law, however
we should not send a signal in society that a person below 18 years of age can commit any kind
of heinous acts and still get away with a minor penalty . So, need is to take into account mental
maturity age of person and not just chronological age while deciding the case. Facilities at
reformation centre should be improved so that real rehabilitation happens rather than just lip
service.

Today, with breakdown of joint family system, rise of nuclear family, increasing influence of
social media children are exposed to a number of threats -psychological, physical, sexual. In our
country inspite of political equality, inequalities like socio-economical, regional, are wide
spread. Need of the hour is to build character of our future generation. Society should evolve a
procedure (Mentoring, etc) to supervise and guide children during adolescent age so that they
learn to respect fellow citizens, RTE act should be strengthen to include children up to 18 years
of age into education system, since education has a transformative effect on a person, training to
deal with different crisis in life and most important patriarchal attitude of society towards
females should change.

Page | 20
Page | 21