Juveniles, benefits and privileges of: India

From Indpaedia
(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Social background)
(Juveniles, determination of age)
Line 12: Line 12:
 
[[Category: Law,Constitution,Judiciary|J]]
 
[[Category: Law,Constitution,Judiciary|J]]
 
[[Category:Name|Alphabet]]
 
[[Category:Name|Alphabet]]
 +
 +
=Social background=
 +
[http://epaperbeta.timesofindia.com//Article.aspx?eid=31808&articlexml=Most-juveniles-in-conflict-with-law-from-poor-13052015022032 ''The Times of India''], May 13 2015
 +
[[File: Juveniles in conflict with law.jpg|Some facts: Juveniles in conflict with law; Graphic courtesy: [http://epaperbeta.timesofindia.com//Article.aspx?eid=31808&articlexml=Most-juveniles-in-conflict-with-law-from-poor-13052015022032 ''The Times of India''], May 13 2015|frame|500px]]
 +
 +
Himanshi Dhawan
 +
 +
''' Most juveniles in conflict with law from poor families '''
 +
 +
With the Juvenile Justice (amendment) Bill expected to be taken up by Rajya Sabha, an independent study across observation homes and special homes in four states has traced the profile of a juvenile delinquent.
 +
Preliminary data collated by NGO Butterflies reveals a “juvenile'' caught in the country's legal system is a working child, from a disturbed family background who has been associated with petty crime. The children are overwhelmingly from economically and socially backward sections of society.
 +
 +
The socio-economic pro file is based on an ongoing study of 605 children from homes in Delhi, Odisha, Tamil Nadu and Kerala.
 +
 +
The study found that majority of the parents were labourers or from service oriented occupations like tailoring, construction, carpentry while 63.2% of the children were engaged in some work or the other. “The preliminary data suggests that it is only the children of low economic and social background get caught while those in the middle and high income group are able to settle outside the judicial process,'' Rita Panicker from Butterflies said.
 +
 +
About 16.8% children were deprived of any formal schooling while 50.8% studied up to primary level. Not surprisingly, nearly half the parents did not have formal schooling. In another significant revelation 33.4% of the children came from families where one or both parents had died or had step families, separated families, were abandoned or lived on the street.
 +
 +
Socially too the children were found to be disadvantaged. Out of the 442 children who knew their caste 90% belonged to backward classes underlying the vulnerability experiences by marginalized communities. Scheduled caste accounted for 20.4%, scheduled tribes for 4.6% while OBCs were 40.8% of the children studied.
 +
  
 
= Juveniles, determination of age  =
 
= Juveniles, determination of age  =

Revision as of 03:37, 8 June 2015

This is a collection of articles archived for the excellence of their content.
You can help by converting these articles into an encyclopaedia-style entry,
deleting portions of the kind normally not used in encyclopaedia entries.
Please also fill in missing details; put categories, headings and sub-headings;
and combine this with other articles on exactly the same subject.

Readers will be able to edit existing articles and post new articles directly
on their online archival encyclopædia only after its formal launch.

See examples and a tutorial.

Contents

Social background

The Times of India, May 13 2015

Some facts: Juveniles in conflict with law; Graphic courtesy: The Times of India, May 13 2015

Himanshi Dhawan

Most juveniles in conflict with law from poor families

With the Juvenile Justice (amendment) Bill expected to be taken up by Rajya Sabha, an independent study across observation homes and special homes in four states has traced the profile of a juvenile delinquent. Preliminary data collated by NGO Butterflies reveals a “juvenile caught in the country's legal system is a working child, from a disturbed family background who has been associated with petty crime. The children are overwhelmingly from economically and socially backward sections of society.

The socio-economic pro file is based on an ongoing study of 605 children from homes in Delhi, Odisha, Tamil Nadu and Kerala.

The study found that majority of the parents were labourers or from service oriented occupations like tailoring, construction, carpentry while 63.2% of the children were engaged in some work or the other. “The preliminary data suggests that it is only the children of low economic and social background get caught while those in the middle and high income group are able to settle outside the judicial process, Rita Panicker from Butterflies said.

About 16.8% children were deprived of any formal schooling while 50.8% studied up to primary level. Not surprisingly, nearly half the parents did not have formal schooling. In another significant revelation 33.4% of the children came from families where one or both parents had died or had step families, separated families, were abandoned or lived on the street.

Socially too the children were found to be disadvantaged. Out of the 442 children who knew their caste 90% belonged to backward classes underlying the vulnerability experiences by marginalized communities. Scheduled caste accounted for 20.4%, scheduled tribes for 4.6% while OBCs were 40.8% of the children studied.


Juveniles, determination of age

Don’t focus on age to define juveniles: HC

By Ajay Sura, TNN, 2013/03/30

The Times of India

Chandigarh:Against the backdrop of a raging debate on the age of juvenile offenders following the Nirbhaya rape, the Punjab and Haryana high court has held that benefits and privileges of juveniles should not be accorded to minors involved in monstrous crimes merely because of their biological age. Instead, it should be premised on the ability of offenders to understand the consequences of their actions.

“It is the advancement of the mental faculty of juvenile accused, which would suggest whether he is an adult or a juvenile,” the HC held.

It recommended a specialized examination of minors by experts who can evaluate their ability to segregate good and bad to show their maturity or immaturity to answer for the deeds.

Justice Mahesh Grover of the Punjab and Haryana high court passed this judgment while dismissing the bail petition of a minor, a Class VII student, who had allegedly raped two girls of Class IX and X of his own school.

The verdict came last week and a copy of the judgment was made available on Friday.

School records can’t be taken as certificate of a person’s age: HC

It and is factors maturity related psychological to growth - ly and socially, but not entirely biologically, that would give an insight as to whether a person is a child or an adult, Justice Mahesh Grover of the Punjab abd Haryana HC has ruled.

“The courts ought not automatically assume that the statutory definition would confer the halo of a juvenile and give him an undeserving protection and benefits,” the court observed.

“In a country like ours the age given in the school certificate or the records of the school would only speak of an age imaginatively conjured by the parents at the time of admission. Even though it may form a persuasive piece of material, but certainly no credence and outright acceptability should be afforded to it.”

In this case, the juvenile from Chuchakwas village in Jhajjar district in Haryana had kidnapped the two girls in October last year. Both the victims and accused remained untraced for 10 days, during which the accused had allegedly raped both the girls at different places. While dismissing the bail plea of the accused, HC has asked the Juvenile Justice Board to consider the case in view of the observations.

'3-Year Term Holds Even If Accused Turns Adult In A Year'--SC

Juvenile.png

SC had settled issue of ‘adult’ in juvenile home

Said 3-Yr Term Holds Even If Accused Turns Adult In A Year

Smriti Singh TNN

The Times of India 2013/09/01

New Delhi: With the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) sending the Nirbhaya [rape] case [of 16 Dec 2012] juvenile accused—now an adult — to a reformatory home, the debate surrounding the fact that he cannot be kept in a reformatory home for minors as the JJ Act does not allow adults to be kept with juveniles has been put to rest.

Just a month before the JJB verdict, an order passed by Supreme Court helped in clearing the doubts surrounding the status of the juvenile before the law and where he could be kept once he attained majority. While deciding the writ petition which sought bringing down the age of the juvenile to 16 years, Supreme Court had also dealt with the issue of the provision to keep a person in a juvenile home after he attains majority during the pendency of his trial.

What happens to a juvenile found guilty of a heinous offence when he turns adult?

“One misunderstanding of the law relating to the sentencing of juveniles needs to be corrected. The general understanding of a sentence that can be awarded to a juvenile under Section 15 (1)(g) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, prior to its amendment in 2006, is that after attaining the age of 18 years, a juvenile who is found guilty of a heinous offence is allowed to go free…It was generally perceived that a juvenile was free to go, even if he had committed a heinous crime, when he ceased to be a juvenile,” observed the bench, which was presided over by the then Chief Justice of India, Altmas Kabir.

The bench said that the “understanding” of the situation needed to be clarified in the light of the 2006 amendment in the JJ Act. “The amendment now makes it clear that even if a juvenile attains the age of 18 years within a period of one year, he would still have to undergo a sentence of three years, which could spill beyond the period of one year when he attained majority,” the bench observed in its July 17 order.

This clarification by the apex court settles the debate as well as the law surrounding the juvenile delinquent, who attain majority during the pendency of the trial.

Earlier, if found involved in the crime after he turned 18, a juvenile could not be kept in the juvenile correction home or any other reformatory home for minors as the Juvenile Justice (JJ) Act did not allow adults to be kept with juveniles in correction homes. At the same time, the juvenile who had attained majority could not be transferred to Tihar Jail as the law did not allow such persons tried under the JJ Act to be kept in jail meant for adults.

House Panel refuses to try juveniles as adults

The Times of India

Feb 26 2015

Himanshi Dhawan

A parliamentary panel has shot down the government’s move to try juveniles — between 16 and 18 years of age — who have committed heinous crimes as adults on grounds that it is discriminatory, in contravention of the UN Rights of Child and in violation of Article 14 that ensures all are equal in the eyes of law. The committee was unimpressed by the women and child development (WCD) ministry’s contention that there had been a rapid increase in juveniles, aged 16 to 18, committing crimes like rape, murder and acid attacks. It has asked the ministry to review the amendments and rename the law as the word “juvenile’’ has a negative connotation.

There had been a series of cases, including the Nirbhaya gang rape, Shakti Mills rape case and others, where juveniles were involved and got away with a maximum of three years in a reformatory home. The amendments to the Juvenile Justice Act were proposed by the then UPA government in view of the public outrage after the Nirbhaya gang rape in December 2012.

WCD ministry officials argued that National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) data revealed that the number of children apprehended for heinous crimes, especially in the age group of 16-18 years, had gone up significantly in recent times. From 531 murders in 2002, the figure had gone up to 1,007 in 2013 while for rapes and assaults, crimes recorded were up from 485 to 1,884 during the same period.

The report tabled in Rajya Sabha on Wednesday said that juvenile crime ac counted for only 1.2% of a population of 472 million children in the country and that this percentage had remained constant over 2012 and 2013. The committee also noted that many of the juveniles were acquitted as they were not found guilty.

“The committee can only conclude that the existing juvenile system is not only reformative and rehabilitative but also recognizes the fact that 16-18 years is an extremely sensitive and critical age requiring greater protection. Hence, there is no need to subject them to different or adult judicial system as it will go against Articles 14 and 15(3) of the Constitution,’’ the report said.

See also

Juveniles, benefits and privileges of

Juvenile delinquency in India

Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Toolbox
Translate