The Parliament has finally passed the much debated Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Bill. The Bill will empower the courts of law to try juveniles in the age group of 16-18 for heinous crimes. Actually, the origin of tabling this bill is liked to the Nirbhaya gang rape case of 2012 in which a juvenile aged 16 was also found involved and there surfaced controversy over his prosecution under the existing law. The Government moved at least 42 amendments to the bill which were accepted whereas two amendments moved by the opposition, one by Congress and one by RSP, were rejected. Piloting the bill, Minister for Women and Child Development, Maneka Gandhi said that the new law intended to be a “deterrent” to ensure that juveniles refrain from crimes and avoid spoiling their lives. Justifying the need for the new law, she said according to National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), around 28,000 juveniles had committed various crimes in 2013 and of them, 3887 had allegedly committed heinous crimes.
She also cited a recent Supreme Court order wherein the Apex court had favoured a re-look at the law in view of the growing number of juveniles involved in heinous crimes.
About arming the judiciary with authority to move against the juveniles for committing heinous crimes, we have to say that more often than not juveniles do not very often offer to commit crimes. A third party actually makes them their instruments. A third party actually makes them their instrument. As such, if the juvenile have nice training and healthy cultural environs at home, there is very little possibility of them turning criminals. In this way, the essential and fundamental responsibility lies with the parents who must ensure that their children or wards refrain from indulging in criminal activities. In some countries, law-enforcing agencies even reprimand parents of an erring juvenile for neglecting their responsibility towards their children. In any case, we hope that the State will enforce new law on juvenile crime judiciously.