Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015

The Ministry of Women and Child Development began contemplating several desired amendments in 2011 and a process of consultation with various stake holders was initiated. The Delhi gang rape case in December 2012 had tremendous impact on public perception of the Act. One of the accused in the 2012 Delhi gang rape was a few months younger than 18 years of age and under the Act was tried in a juvenile court. In the second week of July 2013, the Supreme Court dismissed the objections, holding the Act to be constitutional. Demands for a reduction of the age of adults from 18 to 16 years were also turned down by the Supreme Court, when the government of India stated that there is no proposal to reduce the age of an adult. On 31 August 2013, the case returned to the juvenile court and a sentence of 3 years in a reform home was handed down. The victim's mother criticized the verdict and said that by not punishing the juvenile the court was encouraging other teenagers to commit similar crimes. In July 2014, Minister of Women and Child Development, Maneka Gandhi said that they were preparing a new law which will allow 16-year-olds to be tried as adults. She said that 50% of juvenile crimes were committed by teens deliberately, but they thought that they could get away with it. She added that changing the law, which will allow them to be tried for murder and rape as adults, would scare them. The bill was introduced in the Parliament by Maneka Gandhi on 12 August 2014. On 22 April 2015, the Cabinet cleared the final version after some changes. A revamped Juvenile Justice Bill was passed in the Lok Sabha on 7 May 2015. The new bill will allow minors in the age group of 16-18 to be tried as adults if they commit heinous crimes. The heinous crime will be examined by the Juvenile Justice Board to ascertain if the crime was committed as a 'child' or an 'adult'. == Summary ==

The bill will allow a Juvenile Justice Board (JJB), which would include psychologists and social workers, to decide whether a juvenile criminal in the age group of 16-18 should be treated as an adult or not. The bill also seeks to make the adoption process of orphaned, abandoned and surrendered children more streamlined. The bill introduces foster care in India. Families will sign up for foster care and abandoned, orphaned children, or those in conflict with the law will be sent to them. Such families will be monitored and shall receive financial aid from the state. In adoption, disabled children and children who are physically and financially incapable will be given priority. Parents giving up their child for adoption will get 3 months to reconsider, compared to the earlier provision of 1 month. A person giving alcohol or drugs to a child shall be punished with 7 years imprisonment and/or fine. Corporal punishment will be punishable by or 3 years of imprisonment. A person selling a child will be fined with and imprisoned for 5 years. ==2021 amendments==

As of July 2018, there were 629 adoption cases pending in various courts. In order to expedite adoption proceedings, the new amendment transfers the power to issue adoption orders to the district magistrate. In 2021, The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Amendment Act, 2021 was passed by the Parliament of India. The previous provisions state that adoption of a child is final on the issuance of an adoption order by the civil court. The new amendment provides that instead of the court, the district magistrate shall issue such adoption orders. As per the 2015 Act, offences committed by juveniles are categorised as heinous offences, serious offences and petty offences. Serious offences include offences with three to seven years of imprisonment. The new amendment adds that serious offences will also include non-heinous offences for which maximum punishment is imprisonment of more than seven years and minimum punishment is not prescribed or is less than seven years. ==Criticism==

During the debate in the Lok Sabha in May 2015, Shashi Tharoor, an INC Member the Parliament (MP), argued that the law was in contradiction with international standards and that most children who break the law come from poor and illiterate families. He said that they should be educated instead of being punished. According to the Supreme Court, the makers and framers of the law committed a serious mistake to allow juveniles to evade being treated as adults in such cases of hit-and-run, leading to homicide not amounting to murder. As a result of this, the Juvenile Justice Board has been criticized for rejecting petitions from families of victims and law enforcement to try minors as adults for involvement in hit-and-run cases which resulted in deaths, as well as granting bail to the culprits on frivolous grounds. ==See also==