The Juvenile Justice (Care And Protection Of Children) Act, 2015, Critical Analysis On Provisions Relating To CCL
Author: LawSphereX
Category: Criminal Law
Published:
Updated:
THE JUVENILE JUSTICE (CARE AND PROTECTION OF
CHILDREN) ACT, 2015, CRITICAL
ANALYSIS
ON PROVISIONS RELATING TO CCL Nehal Jain, Mohanlal Sukhadia University, University College of Law, Udaipur, Rajasthan Vinay Jain, Mohanlal Sukhadia University, University College of Law, Udaipur, Rajasthan “Humanity has the stars in its future, and that future is too important to be lost under the burden of juvenile folly and ignorant superstition. ” ~Isaac Asimov Juvenile delinquency has yet again made it to the headlines for all the contentious reasons, when Vedant Agarwal, a 17-year-old drunk boy drove his father’s Porsche and killed 2 young techies in a road accident. Famously known as the ‘PUNE PORSCHE CASE’, which has significantly brought back to light the apertures of the JJ Act 2015.
This happened when the Juvenile Justice Board rejected the Pune police’s request to try the accused as an adult and released the accused on bail within 15 hrs of his arrest on conditions as ignorant and vague as writing a 300-word long essay. The board however retracted the decision, after a huge public backlash on the bail order, by sending him to the remand home till 5th June. Though he wasn’t declared innocent, the news of his release sparked debates. This order of the board was subsequently declared illegal and ultra vires by the Bombay High Court which further ordered the release of the juvenile from the observation home. This article aims to critically discuss the provisions of the JJ Act concerning child in conflict with law.
EVOLUTION AND HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE The 1st law to address such children was the 1880's Apprentices Act which focused on rehabilitation rather than punishment.
The concept of juvenile delinquency as well as juvenile justice has significantly evolved over the years as various legislations, international conventions came into the the legal landscape of the Indian democracy reflecting that a special and unique way of understanding was required while dealing with the young offenders. However, it was in 1920 that a juvenile court was set up in Bombay for the first time under the ambit of the Children Act 1920. Post- Postindependence, in 1960, the Children Act was enacted to deal with children in conflict with the law, which further was replaced by 1986’s Juvenile Justice Act. It introduced the juvenile welfare board and observation homes and a broader outlook was developed which recognized juveniles as children in need of protection and care rather than criminals.
The United Nations, in 1989 adopted a convention on the rights of children of which India was also a signatory defining human beings below the age of 18 years as a child thus the Juvenile Justice Act of 1986 was repealed in 2000. Finally, the Juvenile Justice Care and Protection of Children Act 2000 was replaced by the Juvenile Justice Care and Protection Act, 2015; hereinafter referred to as JJ ACT 2015. THE JUVENILE JUSTICE(CARE AND PROTECTION OF CHILDREN)ACT,2015 JJ Act 2015 was granted the president’s assent on 31st December 2015.
It aims to consolidate and amend the law relating to children alleged and found to conflict with the law and children in need of care and protection by catering to their basic needs through proper care, protection, development, treatment, and social reintegration by adopting a childfriendly approach in the adjudication and disposal of matters in the best interest of children and for their rehabilitation through processes provided and institutions and bodies established, hereunder and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. 1 CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS The constitution of any country is considered to be the supreme law of the land and every other legislation derives its authority and validity from it. JJ act is also a product of several such provisions of the constitution along with adherence to international conventions. Several
1 Juvenile justice act, 2015, No 2 Acts of parliament, 2015, (India)
provisions of the constitution impose the duty upon the state to make efforts to better the condition of children and safeguard their interests. ● Article 47 specifically provides that it is the primary duty of the State to raise the level of nutrition and standard of living. ● Article 15(3) of the Indian constitution provides that the state may form special provisions with respect to children and women. ● Article 21 protects the life and liberty of an individual and is of utmost significance. ● Article 21A provides that every child under the age group of 6 to 14 years should get free and compulsory education. ● Article 23 and Article 24 provide rights against exploitation and prohibit human trafficking as well as forced labour of children below the age of 14 years in factories respectively.
● The directive principles of state policy under Article 39(e) directs the state to ensure that the tender age of children is not abused and that they are not forced to enter into jobs not suited to their age and strength just because of economic necessity. ● Similarly, Article 39 (f) further directs the state to ensure that better opportunities are provided to children so that they can develop in a healthy environment and are protected from any kind of exploitation and abandonment. ● Article 45 states that the state must ensure that early childhood care and protection must be provided to a child till he completes the age of 6 years The provisions of JJ Act apply to all matters concerning children in need of care and protection and children in conflict with law. Both of these terms are defined under the interpretation clause of the statute.
The Act also provides for two different bodies to deal with both these classes of children. These bodies are JJ board and Child Welfare Committee. Both these bodies derive their powers and duties from the act itself. The Act further defines certain necessary terms: a. Child: a person who has not completed eighteen years of age2; b. Child in conflict with the law: a child who is alleged or found to have committed an offence and who has not completed eighteen years of age on the date of commission of such offence 3; c. Juvenile: a child below the age of eighteen years4; Thus according to the definitions, the meaning of the word Juvenile Juvenile originates from the Latin term ‘juvneis’ which means ‘young’.
The United Convention on the Rights of Child defines a child as “every human being below the age of 18 years unless, under the law applicable to the child, the majority is attained earlier. ” Similarly in the Indian context, a person below 18 years of age is known as a juvenile. Moreover, the aim of the JJ Act is not to arrest young criminals but to discern them. Thus, courts are of the view that anticipatory bail has no importance or role to play under the JJ Act. This has led to inconsistent and contradictory decisions by different courts. This will be further discussed while discussing section 12 of the JJ Act as it has played a pivotal role in the change of opinions of the courts. Juvenile justice is also not limited just to the JJ Act. Provisions of IPC and CrPC have a huge impact in dealing with such conflicts. They help in implementing the criminal provisions accurately.
IPC provides for children in conflict with law under the general exceptions, where Section 825 states that ‘nothing is an offence which is done by a child under seven years of age’, and Section 836 provides for children aged between 7-12 years excluding all such children under this age group from criminal liability provided that they have not attained sufficient maturity to understand consequences of their actions. Crpc however, provides for jurisdiction related to the matters involving juveniles. Section 27 provides that “any offence committed by a person who is below the age of 16 whose punishment does not include death or imprisonment will be dealt with by the law which provides treatment, training, imparting good social values and rehabilitation of convicted
2 Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, § 2(12), No. 2, Acts of Parliament, 2015, (India)
3 Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, § 2(13), No. 2, Acts of Parliament, 2015, (India)
4 Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, § 2(35), No. 2, Acts of Parliament, 2015, (India)
5 Indian Penal Code, 1860, § 82, No. 45, Acts of Parliament, 1860, (India)
6 Indian Penal Code, 1860, § 83, No. 45, Acts of Parliament, 1860, (India)
minors.”7
LEGAL FRAMEWORK
AND IMPORTANT PROVISIONS UNDER JUVENILE JUSTICE ACT The Juvenile Justice Act after the incident of the Nirbhaya case was extensively amended based on the requirements, and new reforms were introduced. The act provides an effective and efficient organised system at various levels as well as procedures to deal with children who are in conflict with the law as well as those in need of care and protection. The legislation is based on a reformative approach aiming at rehabilitation and reformation of offenders rather than retribution or deterrence. General principles of care and protection of children The act provides for certain principles which form the basis of adjudging the matters under this act. Section 3 of the Juvenile Justice Act lays down 16 basic principles to be followed relating to the care and protection of children. There are as follows:
1. Principle of presumption of innocence
2. Principle of dignity and work
3. Principle of participation
4. Principle of best interest
5. Principle of family responsibility
6. Principle of safety
7. Positivity measures
8. Principle of non-stigmatizing
7 The Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973, § 27, No. 2, 1974, (India)
9. Principle of non-waiver of rights
10. Principle of equality and non-discrimination
11. Principle of right to privacy and confidentiality
12. Principle of institutionalisation as a last resort
13. Principle of repatriation and restoration
14. Principle of a fresh start
15. Principle of diversion
16. Principles of natural justice
The Central government, State government, and other agencies must follow the abovementioned fundamental principle while implementing the act. CHAPTER III of the act imparts certain duties and powers to one of the bodies under the act, which is The Juvenile Justice Board. Section 4 empowers the State Government to constitute one or more Juvenile Justice Boards for every district to deal with matters concerning children in conflict with law. Constitution of Juvenile Justice Board The board shall consist of a metropolitan magistrate or a judicial magistrate of first class as a principal magistrate having 3 years of experience, provided that he must not be a Chief Metropolitan or Chief Judicial Magistrate.
The board shall also consist of 2 social workers out of which one shall be a women and such person should be actively involved in health, education or welfare activities pertaining to children for at least seven years or he must be a practising professional with a degree in child psychology, psychiatry, sociology or law. The bench so constituted shall have the powers of a metropolitan magistrate or a judicial magistrate as specified under the code of criminal procedure, 1973.
This section further provides for appointment, eligibility and term of the board members. One of the most important aspects of this chapter is related to the determination of the trial of the matter, i. e. ; whether the child should be dealt with under the JJ act or any other act when during the pendency of the trial/inquiry the child completes the age of majority. Section 58 of the act clarifies this question by stating that if the inquiry of the case is started under JJ Act and the matter still being pending, the inquiry will continue to be done under this act itself even if the minor has attained the age of majority. This section upholds the minor’s rights and the aim of this act. SECTION 6 of the act deals with the placement of a person who committed the offence when he was below the age of 18 years.
The section clarifies that if the person while committing the offence was below the age of 18 years but at the time of apprehension has completed the age of 18, then such person shall be treated as a child during the inquiry process. Such a person must be kept in a place of safety if he/she hasn’t been released on bail further such person must be treated in accordance with the provisions of the act. Thus while dealing with any person under this act the age of the person at the time of committing the offence must be considered. SECTION 7 AND SECTION 8 of the act deal with the procedure to be followed by the board; and the powers as well as its functions respectively. Section 7 states that the board shall meet and follow such rules regarding the transaction of business in meetings as may be prescribed.
The board must make sure that a child-friendly environment is maintained and the place of meeting must not intimidate the child as if that of a regular court. When the board is not sitting then the child in conflict with law may be presented before an individual member. It has been further specified that no order of the board may be deemed invalid on the grounds of absence of any member however at least two members including the principal magistrate 8Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, § 5, No. 2, Acts of Parliament, 2015, (India) must be present while disposing of the case or in making the order under sub-section (3) of section 18. Section 7(4) states that in case there exists any kind of disagreement among the board during interim or final disposal then the opinion of the majority must prevail, but in case there is no majority then order of principle magistrate will be final.
CHAPTER IV of the JJ Act deals with the provisions related to procedure to be followed in relation to a child in conflict with the law. The chapter widely spread over from Sections 10-
26 specifies all the key aspects and solutions like that of bail, children’s court, apprehension,
preliminary assessment and so on, thus overall the chapter has a significant role in order to ensure that child-friendly procedure throughout the legal process is followed and the interest of such child is safeguarded. SECTION 10 states that as soon as a child who is alleged to be in conflict with law is apprehended by the police shall produce the child before the board within 24 hours excluding the journey time. The child must be kept under the charge of the special juvenile police unit or the designated child welfare police officer. It further states that such a child must not be kept in lockup or lodged in a jail. The section can be further related to Article 22 of the Indian constitution as well as Section 57 of CrPC which states similar provisions.
ARTICLE 22 OF INDIAN CONSTITUTION Every person who is arrested and detained in custody shall be produced before the nearest magistrate within a period of twenty-four hours of such arrest excluding the time necessary for the journey from the place of arrest to the court of the magistrate and no such person shall be detained in custody beyond the said period without the authority of a magistrate. SECTION 57 OF CrPC ‘’No police officer shall detain in custody a person arrested without warrant for a longer period than under all the circumstances of the case is reasonable, and such period shall not, in the absence of a special order of a Magistrate under section 167, exceed twenty-four hours exclusive of the time necessary for the journey from the place of arrest to the Magistrate's Court. ’’ SECTION 11 talks about the role of the person in whose charge a child in conflict with law is kept.
It provides that a person, under whose charge a child in conflict with law is kept, will be responsible as if such person is the parent of the child and will be responsible for all the maintenance till the time the order is in force. Further, the proviso clause of the section says that the child despite being claimed by the parents or any other person will continue to be in charge of such person till the period as specified by the board but not in the case where the board is of opinion that the parents or the other person are fit to exercise the charge over the child. SECTION 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act is one of the most important sections as it deals with the provisions of bail to a person who is apparently alleged to be a child in conflict with law. In the landmark judgement of State of Rajasthan v.
BalchandAlias Baliya9 the apex court laid down a very prominent legal principle that ‘Bail is rule, jail is an exception. ’The judgement was given considering various facets out of which Article 21 was also highlighted stating that detention of an individual infringes his basic right to life and personal liberty. The main purpose of detention is to ensure easy proceedings by availing the accused for the trials with no inconvenience. Thus, if it is often ensured that the accused are going to be available as and when required for the trial, then, detaining the person isn’t necessary. Therefore, it had been held that the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) regarding the arrest of a private must be interpreted in a sense that unless indispensable, detention of an individual must be avoided.
10 Section 12 of the JJ Act is a non-observant clause and clearly states that anything contained in CrPC or any other law will not be considered when dealing with a person i. e. ; juvenile under this section in matters related to bail. The section also clearly mandates that any person who is a child alleged to be in conflict with law then the nature of offence whether bailable or non-bailable,is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before the board must be released on bail.
9 1977 AIR 2447
10 Syeed Mohammed Tayyab,Bail is a matter of right, jail an exception,The Daily
Guardian,(june3,2004,8.15pm),https://thedailyguardian.com/bail-is-a-matter-of-right-jail-an-exception/ Such bail may be granted with or without surety and such person so released on bail must be kept under the supervision of a probation officer or under the care of any fit person. Thus it is clear from the above provisions that bail to a juvenile is a must, however only in certain exceptional circumstances it can be denied. Aim of JJ act is not to apprehend the wrongdoer but to identify him and rehabilitate the pernicious traits. Thus the rejection of bail application under the JJ Act is limited to very few grounds. The following are the grounds on which bail to a juvenile can be denied;
1. If the release will likely bring that person into the association of any criminal;
2. Expose that person to moral, physical or psychological danger or
3. The person’s release would defeat the ends of justice.
The board must record the reasons for denying the Bail as well as the circumstances so related to such a decision. This was however the very basis of the criticism that the board faced after releasing the juvenile in the infamous ‘Porsche case’. Public outrage was regarding the vague bail order which was accompanied by the punishment of writing a 300-word essay. This massive outrage was however a picture of our society and its changing psyche and was rightly so backed by several such incidents where children in disguise of the protections provided by such acts and provisions escape the liabilities and consequences of their own actions. It was very evident from the facts of the present matter that the accused was voluntarily intoxicated and subsequently drove the car. These facts clearly present the mental status of the accused.
There are several such matters where the conduct of the accused itself presents a clear picture of their mental status. Thus enactment as such where all the provisions are designed mainly for the protection of the juvenile end up defeating other purposes of this act such as rehabilitation of the offenders. These protections, therefore, instead of being beneficial for the society and juvenile end up being detrimental to the cohesive existence of both these entities. It motivates the offensive tendencies of juvenile offenders and thus leads to a disturbed and unsatisfied society. With changing times and easing accessibility to various resources the minds and mental status have become much more advanced than what it used to be in times when these acts were enacted.
Thus after witnessing the current growing trend of such offences the need for immediate action with regards to such provisions is quite evident. Further, the act clarifies that in no circumstances a juvenile can be kept in a lockup or jail, thus section 438 of CrPC which deals with the provision of anticipatory bail has no application. the same has been stated by the judiciary through its various judgments however there still exist different viewpoints. In the case of Piyush Minor Through His Natural Mother ... vs State Of Haryana11 it was held that a reading of provisions of Section 438 Cr. P. C. vis-a-vis of relevant provisions of the Act would show that a juvenile cannot be arrested and thus, there is no question of apprehension of his arrest. Hence, the petition under Section 438 Cr. P. C. is not maintainable in case of a juvenile. In this regard, K. Vignesh v. State rep.
by the Inspector of Police12 is an important legal case study in which the main question before the court was to decide whether an application under section 438 of CrPC is maintainable or not in regard to a juvenile. The high court while giving the judgement took a very reliable stance while observing the provisions of section 12 that a reading of the entire scheme of the Act would inform that no authority, including the police, has been empowered to arrest a child in conflict with law but instead, the child in conflict with law could only be apprehended and produced before the Juvenile Justice Board. The underlying purpose of the scheme appears to be that the legislature wanted the personal interaction of the juvenile with the Board before arriving at a decision regarding his bail. It is manifestly clear that an application seeking anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Cr. P. C.
at the instance of a child in conflict with law is not at all maintainable. Similarly, a direction to the Juvenile Justice Board to release the child in conflict with law cannot be issued by the High Court in the exercise of its inherent power saved under Section 482 of Cr. P. C. Many courts have also accepted the view that this non-obstante clause of JJ act is not for the purpose of taking away from the application of various provisions of bail under CrPC but to
11 2023 PHCC 53099
12 2017 SCC ONLINE MAD 28442
remove barriers as to the grant of bail and enable the board to grant bail despite such barriers. Thus taking a very positive view of this overriding effect of the act. 13 For a very long time, the judiciary has been fighting over the question of whether pre-arrest bail is to be granted by the JJ Act or not. Now the act must make it exclusively clear whether it is a maintainable provision under the act or not. It is also to be noted that courts have in many instances reiterated that the gravity of the crime is no ground for the rejection of the bail. The only three grounds of rejection can be what is mentioned under section 12 of the act. This provision limits the powers of the board and provides vast opportunities for the offenders to find an escape from the liabilities of their actions.
However, it is also observed that the first exception can only be evoked after identifying the criminal, i. e. ; the criminal under whose influence the alleged juvenile is presumed to come must be known. Thus the term ‘known criminal’ is not subject to interpretation and must be construed strictly by the courts. It is not provided to restrict the liberty of the juvenile but to prevent his involvement in commission of any further crimes due to external influence. 14 Thus identifying the criminal is an essential condition to invoke the first ground of rejection of bail to the juvenile, further defeating other purposes of the act. If the bail is declined and the person in question is not released then they shall be kept in an observation home in the prescribed manner, the establishment of which is provided under S.
8 of the act, and if such person on grant of bail fails to fulfil the conditions of the bail, such shall be presented before the board and bail conditions may be modified. The new Juvenile Act of 2015 also introduced a very new and significant provision in the act where on commission of certain offences a juvenile can be tried as an adult. These offences are classified into 3 categories: a. Petty offences: defined under S. 2(45)15 as offences with max imprisonment of 3 years in IPC or any other criminal law. b. Serious offences: defined under S. 2(54)16 as offences with imprisonment between 3
13 Shahaab Ali (Miner) And Another vs State Of U.P., AIRONLINE 2020 ALL 1112
14 Nand Kishore (in JC) v. State (2006), 4 RCR (Cri.) 754
15 Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, § 2(45), No. 2, Acts of Parliament, 2015, (India)
16 Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, § 2(54), No. 2, Acts of Parliament, 2015, (India)
to 7 years in IPC or any other criminal law. c. Heinous offences: defined under S. 2(33)17 as offences with a minimum imprisonment of 7 years or more in IPC or any other criminal law. This classification plays a very important role with regard to the procedure which is to be followed in the further dealing of the offence. Section 14 provides for conducting preliminary inquiry by the board. After being presented before the board within 24 hours of the apprehension of such a juvenile the board shall conduct an inquiry and pass such orders as it may deem fit under Section 18 and Section 17 of the act. 18 Such an inquiry shall be disposed of within 4 months from the date of production. Which may be extended to 2 more months by the board after recording the reason for such extension in writing.
In case of petty offences, if the inquiry isn’t completed even after such an extended period then the proceedings shall stand terminated. But if the case so is with the commission of serious or heinous offences, more time shall be granted by the Chief Judicial Magistrate or the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate as the case may be after recording the reasons in writing. However, the period so fixed is directory and not mandatory as ascertained by the courts in various cases. Validating the above stance the MP high court added that Section 14 is a procedural aspect and it does not in itself create a right for the juvenile to not be tried after the mentioned period. 19 However, the inquiry for heinous offences must take place in a different manner.
For a child below 16 years of age, it must be in accordance with 14(5)(e), but for a child aged 16-18 years, it shall be dealt in accordance with Section 15 of the act. Under Section 1520, the board is entitled to conduct a preliminary assessment in case of a heinous offence, which is alleged to have been committed by a child aged between 16-18 years.
17 Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, § 2(33), No. 2, Acts of Parliament, 2015, (India)
18 Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, § 14, No. 2, Acts of Parliament, 2015, (India)
19 Bhola @ Ashish Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
20 Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, § 15, No. 2, Acts of Parliament, 2015, (India)
Such an assessment is conducted with the aim to ascertain their mental and physical capacity to commit the alleged offence, and the ability to understand the consequences of the done act. This, however, is not done by the members of the board on their own. They with the assistance of experienced psychologists or other such experts conduct this assessment. The explanation to this section further clarifies the intent behind such provision as not a trial but an assessment of the capacity of the alleged child to commit the alleged offence. After this assessment, it is determined whether the alleged juvenile should be tried as an adult or as a child and subsequently, the matter is then disposed off accordingly.
The expert members of the assessment team determine the physical and mental capacity of the alleged child to do the alleged crime and know its consequences and further recommend the board by presenting a report on whether the alleged juvenile should be tried as an adult or as a child. The procedure to further deal with the matter will now be completely different and will depend upon the nature of the inquiry: a. If the board is satisfied that the trial will be disposed of by the board, i. e. ; juvenile to be tried as a child, then it shall follow the procedure for trials in summon cases under CrPC21. b. If the board passes an order that such an alleged child is to be tried as an adult it must with immediate effect transfer the respective matter to the Children court of relevant jurisdiction for further trial22.
This provision of JJ act is however highly cynical, the preamble to the act ascertains at various points the aim of the act as rehabilitation and restoration of the juvenile and their welfare and protection. This particular provision however completely defies the said purpose of the act and is contradictory to its own preamble. When dealing with criminal matters one shouldn’t just look for the intention of the alleged person in committing the act rather we should also look to know the circumstances and influences that drew them to act upon such intentions which in many cases may significantly turn the very nature of the acts done. The act differentiates between the alleged juveniles on the basis of age and those between the 21Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, § 15(2), No. 2, Acts of Parliament, 2015, (India) 22Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, § 18(3), No.
2, Acts of Parliament, 2015, (India) age of 16-18 may in certain cases be tried as adults. While this age group belongs to adolescents they are highly prone to external influences and emotional maturity can never be equated to that of an adult and thus this nexus is violative of rights under Article 14 of the Constitution. When tried as adults and sentenced to imprisonment in adult prisons the child convicted is further dragged into the rug of offences, it instils the feeling of fear and helplessness within such a child and further motivates him to commit other offences. All of it very much defies its own purpose of reformation of such a child.
Further, courts in many instances have reiterated the fact that the purpose of the act is to reintegrate the juvenile back into society and help him lead a better and fruitful life, and so it is an established provision that all the records of a convicted juvenile should be erased in order to help him lead a better social life without the burden of past acts23. However, this is not the case when the child is tried as an adult. In such a scenario all the restrictions imposed upon an adult convict, like disqualification from holding a government office will also be applicable on such a child. This shows that the main focus of the act is not to rehabilitate the child but rather to handle them. Thus the purpose of rehabilitating the child is completely lost within all of it.
The government thus should rather focus more on how to restore and reintegrate a child back in society than to cancel them out of society. This however is only one aspect of the setbacks of this act. The other criticism faced by the act is regarding the present age limit which is set for the difference in trial of the juvenile offender. It is quite evident that with advancing technology and easing accessibility of various resources, the mental growth of a child is not the same as it was a few years back when technology wasn’t as easily accessible. With rapidly changing times and the growing mental capability of children, such acts too need frequent and substantial changes. One such change is a redefined age criteria under section 14 of the act.
Apart from increasing the age limit, the courts shall also interpret such age criteria not only for the benefit of the child but also for society’s betterment. Often it is observed that the judgements of the bench are blurred by the compassion for the accused child, however, it must also be born in the mind that the child is presented before it because they have acted in contradiction to the established law. Even though such matters relating to children in conflict with law must be dealt with utter compassion and sensitivity, the fact that
23 UOI vs Ramesh Bishnoi, AIRONLINE 2019 SC 1564
punishments are not always for the detriment but mostly for the betterment of both the child and the society must be born in the minds of the judgement makers while adjudging the matters.
CONCLUSION
Law and its service, therefore, do not cater to a specific class of people but rather to society as a whole. Thus, while making and interpreting laws one cannot specifically focus on the betterment of only a class of society rather the aim of such interpretation must be influenced, induced and backed by the changing needs and patterns of the society. Law is made for the society and thus must be made by the society, by its changing patterns, and ways of dealings and also must be mindful of its reactions to such interpretations of various statutes by our bodies. This will therefore help both the society and law to progress together cohesively and in harmony with each other.