India Insights: Child Criminality – India’s Treatment of Minor Offenders
Ron Lach
The world’s largest population is composed of 444 million young individuals, ranging from 0 to 18 years old, where 253 million of them are between 10 to 18, making it a fundamental percentage of Indian society. Within the plentitude of youngsters in the country, one of the largest growing concerns is the rapid rise of child criminality rates in the country. Although the Indian Constitution does not criminal procedures for child offenders, it does, however, explains what the principles for the creation and inception of legislations are. Instead, Parliament is the authority empowered to develop said laws. In 2015, the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 was approved by the nation’s Parliament in order to provide an alternative to its’ predecessor Juvenile Act, 2000. The 2015 act is the primordial legal instrument for the protection of children, also what shall be done in the instance of a crime committed by a child.
Regarding the rules for young offenders, there are four determinant factors surrounding them. By the term “child” it is understood any minor, meaning any individual under the age of 18 years old is perceived as a child under the court of law. Nonetheless, it is important to highlight that, depending on the gravity of the crime committed, 16- to 18-year-olds may face trial under the same conditions as adults and face similar punishments. The later will only happen if the crime is understood to be “heinous” and the teens may be tested for their maturity levels prior to the judgment. This policy came into force on July 21, 2026, after extensive deliberation on India’s Supreme Court. Furthermore, younger offenders and those whose crimes were not deemed as heinous will be judged by the Juvenile Justice Board, a specialized body solely focused on adjudicating youth delinquency. Minors will not face the possibility of death sentence.
The Supreme Court’s July decision was scrutinized by members of the general public who believe that juvenile delinquency is more nuanced than other crimes and that minors shall be treated as such. Nevertheless, the decision was reached to further crystalise the legality of trying children as adults under murder circumstances. The Court explained that “murder” must be comprehended as “heinous” in order for minors to be tried as adults under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Section 302 details the proper punishments for the crime of murder, disclosing that any person found guilty of the crime shall face life imprisonment or death sentence, additionally to a mandatory fine.
In an attempt to counter the eventual decision, the juvenile’s lawyer argued that the word “minimum” is nowhere in Section 302, implying that the law does not prescribe a minimum sentence; meaning that murder should not necessarily be a “heinous” crime, but a serious offence instead. The lawyer’s argument is a statutory interpretation of the law, which, if accepted by the court, would mean that 16- to 18-year-olds would be tried as minors. The Supreme Court, however, refuted the claim and ruled against the lawyer’s argument, then deciding that life in prison is the minimum consequence for those found guilty of murder and tried as adults. By the court’s ruling, murder is now considered a heinous offence under the Juvenile Justice Act.
Understanding Child Criminality
In recent years, experts have been witnessing an increase in juvenile delinquency, some even claim that it has the potential to become the most widespread social issue involving youth within India. A study published in the Journal of Education and Health promotion analysed nearly 80 articles concentrating on the social factors that contribute to the existence and growth of juvenile offenders’ activities. Following extensive research on databases, reputable indexes, and articles, the study concluded that children who grew up in households where they were emotionally neglected or dismissed, display a much larger change of partaking in early criminal actions. Those children who have been abandoned by a parent are also at risk of become delinquents. In sum, the detailed study found how imperative family dynamics and financial situations are in building the youths’ behaviour, as well as the necessity of rulers and policymakers to comprehend that when developing and establishing legislation and judging the offenders’ crimes.
Even though India has been experiencing a growth in child criminality, the issue is not a contemporary matter. It has been a feature in Indian society for several years, most notoriously since the 2000s, when the first Juvenile Act was employed. Although a lot has been said about murder, lower degree crimes are more frequently seen on a daily basis. Said crimes may include begging, petty theft, gambling, riots, and others. The study previously mentioned established an important distinction between types of offenders, one being a juvenile in need of care, for instance street children and those without parents and/or guardians. On the other hand, there are individuals in direct conflict with law, who breach legislation and are subject to legal implications. It is, however, important to emphasize that both groups are still subject to the appropriate punishments regardless of the side they find themselves in.
The distinction explained above is crucial when attempting to comprehending the controversy originated from the recent Supreme Court’s ruling. Some have considered the decision generalizing, as it is likely to judge the cases with the same lenses, instead of attempting to understand the nuances and specifications of each individual case. It is overall concerned with rendering invisible the distinctions of different events, children, and backgrounds.
