Delinquency rehabilitation and punishment:
The Latin expression juvenile, which means youthful, is where the name juvenile first appeared. Furthermore, according to the juvenile justice act, a youngster under the age of 18 is considered a juvenile. The most basic legal concept is that when unequal people are together, given equal treatment and given a platform, the consequence is inequality rather than equality, and that children and adults are two separate species. Children are a respected group in society, thus treating juveniles with empathy is necessary.

Keeping these Juveniles with adult offenders would make them criminals rather than help them to rehabilitate. They don’t realise that youngsters shouldn’t receive identical punishments as adults because of their age along with the potential repercussions of their behaviour. Youngsters that require care and protection after running afoul of the law. Considering children are regarded as the most valuable resource in any community or country, it is important for them to grow up to be responsible adults who are cognitively sharp, physically strong, as well as morally sound so they may contribute to the advancement of civilization.

Children commit crimes for a variety of reasons. The juvenile system according to law was created to safeguard the rights of minors and children who have been charged of crimes or who have experienced abuse or abandoned by their biological parents or legal guardians.

Abstract:
This research paper explores the multifaceted dynamics of juvenile justice systems, focusing on their historical evolution, current frameworks, and efficacy in addressing delinquency among youth. It examines the interplay between legal, social, and psychological factors that shape interventions for juvenile offenders. The study emphasizes restorative justice approaches, diversion programs, and the importance of rehabilitation over punitive measures.

Drawing from case studies, statistical data, and policy analysis, it highlights disparities in treatment based on race, socioeconomic status, and geographic location. The research underscores the need for evidence-based reforms that prioritize education, mental health support, and community involvement, aiming to reduce recidivism and foster successful reintegration. This paper advocates for a balanced juvenile justice system that protects public safety while nurturing the potential of young individuals to contribute positively to society.

Introduction:
A juvenile is someone who does not understand what is right and wrong. A crime committed by a juvenile is a crime committed under the age of eighteen, regardless of the seriousness of the offence. Although juvenile crime is not a new crime, in recent times it has gained prominence in Indian news stories. If all charges against a person above the age of 18 are proven true, they have a good probability of being severely punished for whatever horrible crimes they may have committed. However, things could not be the same when it comes to minors.

Over the years, there have been occasions where juveniles have committed horrible crimes, but the punishments meted out have not always adhered to the criteria of a heinous crime. Police estimates state that 10-12 juveniles are apprehended in Delhi each month for murder. According to a recent study by the NCRB, as reported by The Indian Express news website, 30,555 crimes were committed by minors in 2022. Delhi came in sixth place with 2,340 or more instances involving juveniles. Over 2,643 cases were brought against juveniles in 2020. From 2017-2021, 13000 crimes were committed by juveniles.

Juvenile justice act of 1986: first formal attempt by the Indian government at streamlining and formulating a specific law for juveniles in India. Some important provision of 1986 act are:

1. It defined a Juvenile as 16 years of age for boys and 18 years of age for girls.
2. Children were classified under two categories:
   • Juvenile delinquency: Children under the prescribed age who committed an offence.
   • Neglected juveniles: Children who needed care and protection from the state and state institutions.
3. The Act prohibited an arrested child from being detained in police custody or jail under any circumstances.
4. Establishment of Juvenile courts and Juvenile welfare boards.
5. Once the proceedings were completed, the neglected juveniles were sent to Juvenile homes, while the juvenile delinquents were kept in special homes for a prescribed period of time.

Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act, 2000

India had ratified the UN convention on the rights of the child in 1992. The need to bring the domestic law in conformity with the newly evolved and developed international standards that India had agreed to be bound by led to years of effort focusing on revamping the Juvenile Justice system. This resulted in a new philosophy, structure, and institutions. Some of the features of this Act are:

1. "Children in conflict with the law" refers to juveniles who have committed an offence, while "children in need of care and protection" includes those who are being or are likely to be grossly abandoned, abused, tortured, or exploited for the purpose of sexual abuse or illegal acts.
    
2. It also provided for the establishment of various institutions for the care, protection, and rehabilitation of juveniles of separate homes for different age groups in order to separate the younger of endorse from the mature of juveniles this was inconformity with the Beijing rules status on administration of Juvenile justice. The act contemplates remand homes for juveniles and child welfare committee in every district and provides for four types of homes for juveniles -observation homes, special homes, children homes, shelter homes.
   
   The act incorporates the international standards and includes a provision stating that the child's right to participation in proceedings pertaining to him or her (sec 12). This act also clearly recognizes that civil society needs to be involved significantly if true justice is to be provided to all children. Special Juvenile police unit was established to effectively handle juveniles for every police station to have a job in or have child welfare officer who is supposed to be trained and oriented to treating juveniles with care But there was certain criticism for this act like the act is violative of the existing human rights standards which have been evolved by the states at the international level even though its preamble indicates that the law attempts to be inconformity with the same and incorporate the international standard into domestic law.

The best interest principle contradicts with the right to participation principle which is also incorporated in the act reading to a confusion as to whether or not a child opinion on his or her best interest can be overwrite adults imposition of the same through the law. Crucial rides in international legal standard such as child's right to life, right to equality and non discrimination right to human treatment and dignity, right against torture, cruelty, inhumane or degrading treatment or punishment this are important right but where not incorporated in 2000 act given the fact that many children face abuse and exploitation in child care institution were important.

Adequate infrastructure facilities failure of many privately run children's institution to register under the law abuse including sexual abuse in government run as well as privately run institution and the poor implementation of the monetary mechanism such as surprise visits to the child care institutions have further undermine the effectiveness of the law.

The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015
After the rape and murder of a female paramedical intern, there was a public outcry to bring changes into the existing law. The committee was constituted, which was headed by J.S. Verma, in order to outline the deficiencies in the existing criminal law. Though the committee rejected the lowering of age, it demanded to reform the existing juvenile justice and welfare system.

Further, it recommended the proper implementation of existing law. But instead of following the advice, the government introduced the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (also known as the ‘2015 Act’), which had the dual goals of safeguarding victim rights and establishing standards of deterrence for young offenders. In addition to making a distinction between minor, severe, and heinous offences, the 2015 Act suggests treating juvenile offenders who commit ‘heinous offences’ between the ages of sixteen and eighteen as adults and prosecuting them in adult court systems.

The statute holds minors between the ages of 16 and 18 responsible for their conduct and provides appropriate punishments for violent crimes like rape and murder by allowing them to be prosecuted as adults. The act is applicable to minor in need of care and minor in collision with law.

Each district across the nation will be home to two organizations:
the Child Welfare Committee and the Juvenile Justice Board. Adoption and reintegration processes and decisions involving children who are deemed to be in ‘need of care and protection’ are within the purview of the Child Welfare Committee whereas the Juvenile Justice Board, which is made up of two social workers and a magistrate, hears cases involving minors accused of rape.

To ascertain the case’s facts and evaluate the circumstances surrounding the crime, the board launches an investigation. It considers the minor’s age, mental and physical capabilities, and background. Privacy and confidentiality are crucial components of the legal system. Since the proceedings are being done on camera, they are being held in secret and are not available to the general public. This ensures that the juvenile’s name and privacy are protected and does not adversely affect their chances. The juvenile’s reform and rehabilitation are the Juvenile Justice Board’s main priorities.

Criminal Law (Amendment Act): Criminal Law (Amendment Act) passed on March 19, 2013, as it confirmed that minors between the ages of 16 and 18 would face adult trials and punishments for heinous and violent murders and rapes. This prevented them from getting away with committing crimes they might have committed on purpose. 2018 saw more amendments to the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 2013, leading to the passage of the Criminal Law (Amendment Act) of 2018.

Relevant IPC and CrPC Sections:

• IPC Section 82: This section states that nothing is an offense which is done by a child under seven years of age.
• IPC Section 83: This section states that 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 the nature and consequences of his conduct on that occasion.
• IPC Section 304A: This section pertains to causing death by negligence. It recognizes that offenses committed by juveniles may not carry the same degree of criminal intent as those committed by adults.
• CrPC Section 10: This section addresses the competency of a person under 18 years of age to appear as a witness.

Deliquency:
The Black’s Law Dictionary defines the terms Delinquent and Delinquent Child. According to the dictionary a Delinquent [1] is ‘He who has been guilty of some crime, offense, or failure of duty’, and a Delinquent Child[2]is ‘An infant of not more than specified age, who has violated any law or who is incorrigible’. A juvenile is defined in the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, under Section 2(35), which goes on to say ‘juvenile means a child below the age of eighteen years’.

This definition is given in accordance with the criminal proceedings carried out in today’s circumstances. So when a Juvenile commits or takes part in the commission of an illegal activity, they are termed as Juvenile Delinquents. That is, they deviate from society’s paths, and their actions prove to be dangerous for them, their loved ones, and society.

The acts of Delinquency that they can commit may be petty offences or heinous crimes. Once offences are committed, like any other in the society who has committed an offence, they are also subjected to reforms. These reforms can be in the form of punishments or, as we see in most cases are subjected to rehabilitation so that they can be reintegrated into society to restart their lives by following the paths of the society.

They become delinquents because of the way they are brought up, and due to the environment around them, no child is born a delinquent. And so the justice system is bound to provide them with an opportunity to understand the nature of consequences of the acts that they have done, and in turn the justice system is bound to understand the mental, physical and social circumstances under which the juvenile had to do such an act against the society. This is where juvenile justice comes into the picture.

Rehabilitation:
Rehabilitation is a correctional approach that prioritizes the reform and reintegration of offenders into society. Its primary goal is to address the underlying causes of criminal behavior and reduce the likelihood of reoffending. The evaluation of rehabilitation involves examining its effectiveness in achieving these objectives and considering its advantages and disadvantages One key measure of the success of rehabilitation programs is the recidivism rate among participants. A lower recidivism rate suggests that rehabilitation efforts are effective.

Rehabilitation aims to bring about behavioral change, helping individuals develop the skills and attitudes necessary to lead law-abiding lives. Evaluators assess whether participants have demonstrated positive changes in behavior, such as reduced criminal activity, substance abuse, and violence. Successful rehabilitation is also evident when individuals reintegrate into society, find employment, rebuild relationships, and become productive, contributing members of their communities.

The idea of ‘Rehabilitation Juvenile Justice System
The juvenile justice system’s rehabilitation-centric approach is primarily focused on the notion that the children who are offenders have the ability to reform themselves more easily than the adult offenders. This major approach recognizes that a variety of factors usually are responsible to young children’s criminal acts. The justice system basically aims to divert young children from the path of criminality by addressing the cause of it and providing them with proper care and counseling.

Pros of Rehabilitation:

Addressing Root Causes

• Rehabilitation programs are designed to identify and address the underlying factors that lead individuals to commit crimes, such as addiction, mental health issues, or lack of education and job skills. By tackling these root causes, rehabilitation aims to prevent further criminal behavior.
• Reducing Recidivism: When rehabilitation programs are effective, they can significantly reduce the likelihood of individuals reoffending. This not only benefits the individuals themselves but also contributes to public safety.
• Promoting Personal Growth: Rehabilitation offers individuals an opportunity for personal growth and transformation. It acknowledges that people can change and provides them with the tools and support necessary to do so.
• Cost Savings: In the long run, rehabilitation can be more cost-effective than extended periods of incarceration. It reduces the strain on prison resources and minimizes the costs associated with housing and caring for inmates.

Cons of Rehabilitation

• Not Suitable for All Offenders: Rehabilitation may not be suitable for all offenders, particularly those who pose a significant risk to society or have committed heinous crimes. Some individuals may be unresponsive to rehabilitation efforts.
• Resource Intensive: Effective rehabilitation programs require significant resources, including skilled personnel, facilities, and financial investments. Many criminal justice systems struggle with limited budgets and overcrowded prisons.
• Variable Effectiveness: The effectiveness of rehabilitation programs can vary widely. What works for one individual may not work for another. Evaluating which programs are most effective for which types of offenders is a complex task.

Punishment

Punishment in the criminal justice system is a more traditional approach, focusing on retribution and deterrence. The primary goal is to penalize offenders for their criminal actions and create a sense of justice by imposing a proportionate penalty for the crime committed.

• Evaluating punishment involves considering whether it effectively deters criminal behavior, adheres to principles of justice, and serves its intended purpose.
• One key measure of the effectiveness of punishment is its deterrence factor. Punishment aims to deter both the offender and potential future offenders from committing crimes by creating fear of the consequences.
• If punishment successfully discourages criminal behavior, it is seen as a success.
• Evaluators assess whether the punishment is proportionate to the severity of the crime. The principle of proportionality ensures that the punishment fits the offense and upholds the principles of justice and fairness.
• However, the debate often arises about whether punishment addresses the root causes of criminal behavior or merely satisfies society's desire for retribution.

The Idea of ‘PUNISHMENT Juvenile Justice System’

Punishment is the standard method of providing justice in criminal cases. The Indian Penal Code (IPC) carries several punishments for severe offenses, such as imprisonment, fines, and in many cases, the penalty for death.

• The notion is that individuals who are afraid of getting punished are unlikely to commit offenses, whereas those who still commit such offenses must be ready to pay a huge cost for their actions.
• Together with fines and imprisonment, further penalties include capital punishment.

Pros of Punishment

• Justice and Retribution: Punishment provides a sense of justice and retribution for victims and society at large. It holds individuals accountable for their actions and imposes consequences for their wrongdoing.
• Deterrence: When executed effectively, punishment can deter individuals from committing crimes and serve as a warning to potential offenders. The fear of punishment can discourage criminal behavior.
• Clarity and Consistency: The principle of proportionality in punishment ensures that penalties are applied consistently and commensurate with the seriousness of the crime committed.

Cons of Punishment

• Limited Focus on Root Causes: Punishment primarily addresses the immediate consequences of criminal behavior but often fails to tackle the underlying factors that lead individuals to commit crimes in the first place.
• High Incarceration Costs: The cost of incarcerating individuals, especially in cases of lengthy sentences, can be a significant burden on society. The financial resources expended on imprisonment could potentially be allocated to more proactive and rehabilitative measures.
• Recidivism Risk: Punishment alone may not address the risk of recidivism effectively. Without accompanying rehabilitation efforts, individuals released from prison may be more likely to reoffend.

Rehabilitation and Punishment: Major Efficacy

• According to research conducted by specialists at the RJS Coaching Institute, criminal activity and subsequent convictions can be successfully prevented through the use of both punishment and rehabilitation. The degree of success of each approach, however, varies depending on the specific circumstances and the party who committed the offense.
• Rehabilitation approaches that include training for employment, schooling, and treatment for mental disorders have been shown to reduce rates of recidivism.
• Punishment has the capacity to put an end to illegal activity while rendering offenders accountable for what they have done.
• Teachers at different RJS Coaching institutes discuss imposing excessively harsh penalties and help students think critically about them.

In order to manage the delinquents’ trials in a way that is understanding of their situation as children and has the ability to deter such behaviours in the future, these concerns regarding the juvenile criminal justice system must be addressed

Juvenile Justice System: Rehabilitation vs Punishment
The difference between the rehabilitation and the punishment approach under the Juvenile Justice System is often discussed by various experts in laws and justice system or jurists. They are

Rehabilitation

• The objective is to rehabilitate juvenile offenders and reintegrate them into society as valuable members of society.
• It highlights rehabilitation as a fundamental idea.
• Initiatives for young offenders’ rehabilitation include educational programs, career training, and counselling.
• It is established to provide protection to reform the young offenders.

Punishment:

• The objective of the punishment approach is to make them responsible for their actions by implementing punishments, imprisonment, or additional legal consequences.
• It highlights punishment as a fundamental idea.
• In situations where juveniles have committed severe offenses, there is a need to protect the public and prevent further harm.
• It is initiated to punish young offenders from committing further offenses.

Relevant Case law:
Jarnail Singh v. State of Haryana (2013)
In this case, the accused was charged with taking the prosecutrix away from her parents and committing forceful sexual intercourse with her. During the investigation, she was found in his house, as a result of which he was sentenced to ten years of rigorous punishment along with a fine by the sessions court. The accused, being the aggrieved party, appealed the decision and alleged that the prosecutrix allured him to do so and stayed with him with his consent. Moreover, he argued that it was proven that the accuser was a minor.

The Supreme Court of India, in this case, emphasized the significance of embracing a welfare approach towards juvenile offenders. It highlighted that the focus should be on reforming and rehabilitating juveniles rather than subjecting them to punitive measures.

Pratapsingh v state of Jharkhand (2005)
The appellant was arrested in this case for being involved in causing the death of the deceased by poisoning. When he was produced in court, he was 18 years of age, and it was alleged that he was a juvenile when the crime was committed. The case was then transferred to the juvenile court, where his certificates were examined, and it was held that he was a minor on the date the crime was committed and hence released on bail.

The other party was unsatisfied with the decision, and an appeal was made to the Additional Session Judge, wherein it was held that in order to determine the age of a juvenile, the date of production in court is to be considered rather than the date on which the crime was committed.

This decision was affirmed by the High Court of Jharkhand, which stated that the school certificate is the best evidence in this regard. However, the Supreme Court held the date of occurrence of crimes as the criteria to determine the age of juvenility rather than the date on Which such a person was produced before the Court.

Another issue before the Court was determining the applicability of the Juvenile Justice Act (Care and Protection of Children), 2000. The present case was filed under the Juvenile Justice Act of 1986, but by the time it reached the Supreme Court, the 2000 Act had replaced it. Relying on the case of Upendra Kumar v. State of Bihar (2004), wherein it was observed that the purpose of the Act was to help every juvenile, it was held that the 2000 Act will be applicable to the cases pending in any court or authority under the 1986 Act, and those that were still pending when the 2000 Act was enforced and in which the person had not completed the age of 18 years as of 1.4.2001 would be decided according to the 2000 Act.

The Hon'ble Supreme Court also explained the importance of the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice, 1985, also known as the Beijing Rules. These rules are applicable to every juvenile without any discrimination, irrespective of their nationality, caste, race, or religion.

• It considers the trial procedure for adult criminals and the rules applicable to them to be unsuitable for juveniles. Imposing restrictions and penalising juveniles must be the last resort.
• The rules also recognise the fundamentals of the criminal justice system as one of the rights of juveniles, i.e., juveniles must be considered innocent with respect to prosecution.
• Juveniles must be informed regarding the charges and given counselling.
• They have a right to remain silent during investigation or interrogation.
• Their prosecution is done in the presence of their parents or guardian, according to the rules.
• Their right to appeal is recognized under the convention.

Conclusions
In conclusion, the issue of juvenile justice, particularly with respect to rehabilitation, delinquency, and punishment, requires a multifaceted approach that balances accountability with the potential for reform. Research has demonstrated that punitive measures alone often fail to address the underlying causes of juvenile delinquency, such as socio-economic factors, family dynamics, and mental health issues. Rehabilitation programs that focus on education, counseling, skill development, and reintegration into society have proven to be more effective in reducing recidivism and promoting positive long-term outcomes for youth offenders.

Furthermore, a shift towards restorative justice practices, which emphasize repairing harm and restoring relationships, offers a promising alternative to traditional punitive systems. Such approaches not only hold juveniles accountable for their actions but also provide opportunities for personal growth and rehabilitation, allowing them to reintegrate into their communities as law-abiding citizens.

As society continues to grapple with the complexities of juvenile justice, it is imperative that policies and practices prioritize rehabilitation over punishment, aiming to offer young offenders the support they need to overcome the challenges that led to their delinquent behavior. Ultimately, a justice system that recognizes the developmental nature of adolescence and seeks to nurture rather than simply punish will foster a safer, more just society for all.

References:

1. URL: https://thelegalquorum.com/juvenile-justice-system/Abstract
2. URL: https://legalonus.com/juvenile-justice-in-india-should-minors-be-tried-as-adults-for-serious-crimes/#Introduction
3. URL: https://legalonus.com/juvenile-justice-in-india-should-minorsbe-tried-as-adults-for-serious-crimes/
4. URL: https://legalonus.com/juvenile-justice-reform-balancingrehabilitation-and-punishment-in-india/
5. URL: https://www.jyotijudiciary.com/juvenile-justice-systemrehabilitation-vs-punishment/
6. URL: https://blog.ipleaders.in/landmark-juvenile-supreme-court-cases-in-india/
7. The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015
8. Juvenile Justice Act, 1986
9. Juvenile Justice Care and Protection Act, 2000
10. The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
11. The Indian Penal Code, 1980
12. Criminal Law (Amendment Act) of 2013 & 2018
13. Black’s Law Dictionary, Revised 4th Edition