The Allahabad high court has held that the objective of Juvenile Justice Act is not merely to punish child offenders, but to ensure their rehabilitation, development, and reintegration into society.
The court observed that the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 had evolved from a harsh punitive system to embrace the concept of rehabilitative justice, and that the Juvenile Justice Board and Children’s Courts must fulfil the responsibility of rehabilitation and reintegration alongside their judicial duties.
A bench of Justice Ajay Bhanot delivered this judgment on August 31 while hearing appeals from two juvenile offenders from Kasganj and Jalaun.
The court said that the aim of the law was not to isolate children from society through punishment, but to empower them and bring them back into the mainstream. It added that the Juvenile Justice Board and Children’s Courts also acted as guardians of the child. In this system, courts discharge their responsibilities under the principle of parens patriae (guardian of the child), the court said.
The rights of the child must be continuously protected, from arrest to investigation, care, and rehabilitation. If a child in conflict with the law is also found to be in need of care and protection, provisions exist to refer the matter to the Child Welfare Committee.
The court further clarified that the process of rehabilitation and social reintegration does not end with the child’s release. The Juvenile Justice Board must continue its oversight and care. When handing over a child to a fit person, institution, or probation officer, ensuring proper care, education, and welfare remains essential.
The high court stated that the entire framework of the Juvenile Justice Act was built on the premise that a child in conflict with the law was not merely an accused of a crime; equal concern must be given to their development, education, identity, and future.
Therefore, the Juvenile Justice Board and Children’s Courts must act not just as adjudicating bodies, but as institutions dedicated to ensuring the child’s rehabilitation and a better future, the high court said.
