Nearly a decade after the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 was enacted to create a child-friendly approach to adjudication and rehabilitation, a new study suggests the system is struggling to meet its statutory mandates.
The India Justice Report (IJR), in its study titled ‘Juvenile Justice and Children in Conflict with the Law: A Study of Capacity at the Frontlines’, releasing on November 24, paints a picture of a system grappling with structural deficits, high pendency and opaque data.
Here is a breakdown of what the report found and why it matters.
The burden of pendency
The study highlights that as of October 31, 2023, more than 50,000 children in conflict with the law were awaiting justice. Analysing data from 362 Juvenile Justice Boards (JJBs), the report found that 55 percent of juvenile justice cases filed remained pending.
This delay contradicts the core philosophy of the Act, which mandates speedy disposal to prevent children from languishing in the system. The report notes the human cost of these administrative failures: “The legislative promise that a child in conflict with the law will have their case disposed of without delay and in a manner that promotes the child’s sense of dignity and worth remains largely unfulfilled: like adult undertrial prisoners, children are left to bear the consequences of an inconsistent system.”
Broken benches and vacancies
A critical bottleneck identified is enormous vacancies at the adjudicatory level. Under the law, a JJJB must comprise a multi-disciplinary team: a principal magistrate and two social workers. This ensures that legal procedures are balanced with a psychosocial understanding of the child.
However, the study found that nearly one in four JJBs – 24 percent – operated without a Full Bench. Out of the 470 JJBs that responded to queries regarding their composition, 111 were not fully constituted. Only three states/UTs – Odisha, Sikkim and Jammu and Kashmir – reported having fully constituted benches in all districts.
Justice Madan B Lokur, former Judge of the Supreme Court of India, called the findings worrying, saying that it was evidence “of a substantial number of staff vacancies in child care institutions”.
“This has a detrimental effect on children who fall under its purview,” he said.
Infrastructure gaps
The infrastructure meant to house and rehabilitate children shows significant gaps. The report points out that 14 states — including large ones such as Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra and West Bengal — did not have ‘Places of Safety’. These are facilities specifically mandated for children between the ages of 16 and 18 who are accused of heinous offences.
Furthermore, access to legal aid was inadequate. Despite the mandate for every JJB to have an attached legal services clinic, 30 percent of the 437 responding boards reported having none.
Lack of medical care and oversight
Inside Child Care Institutions (CCIs), there is a crisis of support staff shortage. In 15 states that provided data, nearly 80 percent of institutions reported having no medical staff or doctors.
Oversight mechanisms, designed to ensure the safety and well-being of children in custody, also fall far short of statutory targets. While JJBs are legally required to inspect CCIs at least once a month, data from 14 states and J&K showed that only 810 inspections were conducted against a mandated 1,992.
The data black hole
One of the most significant challenges highlighted by the report is the lack of data transparency. There is no central public repository for juvenile cases such as the National Judicial Data Grid for the adult judicial system. The IJR had to file over 250 Right to Information (RTI) applications across 28 states and two union territories to collate the data presented in their report.
Of the more than 500 RTI responses received, 11 percent were rejected outright and 24 percent received no reply.
Maja Daruwala, chief editor of the India Justice Report, explained the structural implication of this data gap.
“The specially designed juvenile justice system is pyramidal in structure. Its optimal functioning relies on information flowing regularly from first responders at individual institutions like police stations and care institutions upwards into overseeing authorities,” she said. “Scattered and irregular data makes supervision episodic and accountability hollow.”
No difference from regular criminal justice
The report concludes that the gap between legislative intent and ground reality remains wide, with the juvenile system often mirroring the inefficiencies of the adult criminal justice system rather than offering a distinct, protective alternative.
“The episodic nature of documentation is a failure of statutory compliance and fails to validate functioning,” the report states. “Unhappily, what documentation there is seems to show that in practice there is little to distinguish the system designed especially for children from the wider justice machinery.”
The study highlights that as of October 31, 2023, more than 50,000 children in conflict with the law were awaiting justice. 
Share
