By : Satyaki Paul
On July 28, 2021 the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Amendment Bill, 2021 was cleared by the Rajya Sabha. Four days earlier it was cleared by the Lok Sabha. The new bill aims to strengthen the child protection setup under the 2015 act.
The Union Minister of Women and Child Development Smt. Smriti Irani lauded the bill for its newer provisions which will prioritize the needs of the children above all issues. But it should be also noted that the Bill was passed in the upper house (Rajya Sabha) without much discussion due to disruptions caused by opposition protesting for enquiring on the issue of Pegasus.
In current context, there are three categories (petty, serious and heinous) defined under the Act which are referred to, while considering the cases of children in conflict with law. But it was observed that some of the offences do not strictly fall under any of these categories. As per the bill, offences where the maximum sentence is more than 7 years imprisonment but no minimum sentence has been prescribed or minimum sentence of less than 7 years is provided, shall be treated as serious offences within this Act. This provision was introduced in consonance with a Supreme Court observation in 2020.
The amendments comprise ofapproving District Magistrate as well as Additional District Magistrate to issue adoption orders under Section 61 of the JJ Act, in order to ensure speedy clearance of cases and to augment accountability. Additionally, the District Magistrates have been empowered under the Act, to ensure its smooth implementation, as well as garner synergized efforts in favour of children in distress conditions. However, it should be also noted that adoption of a child is a legal process which creates a permanent legal relationship between thechild and adoptive parents. Therefore, it may be questioned whether it is appropriate to vest thepower to issue adoption orders with the district magistrate instead of a civil court.As of July 2018, there were 629 adoption cases pending in various courts. In order to expediteadoption proceedings, the Bill transfers the power to issue adoption orders to the districtmagistrate. An issue to consider is whether the level of pendency justifies shifting the load tothe district magistrate.
As per the amended provisions of the Act,any Child Care Institutions shall be registered after considering the recommendations of the District Magistrate. The DM shall independently evaluate the functioning of District Child Protection Units, Child Welfare Committees (CWC), Juvenile Justice Boards, Specialized Juvenile Police Units, Child care Institutions etc.Furthermore, to streamline/redress the situation the eligibility parameters for appointment of CWC members have been redefined. The criteria for disqualification of the CWC members has also been introduced to ensure that only the persons capable of rendering quality service with requisite competence and integrity are appointed to CWC.But if we look into the ground reality, as per the Standing Committee on Human Resource Development (2015); they have noted that variousstatutory bodies under the Act were not present in many states. As of 2019, only 17 of 35states/Union Territories had all basic structures and bodies required under the Act in all districts. In conclusion, it can be observed that there are numerous issues which needs to be redressed so that no one faces the brunt of bureaucratic inefficiency and has to run from pillar to post. Nonetheless, numeroussnags faced in ground level enactment of various provisions of the Act have also been addressed and appropriate amendments to remove these difficulties are the current need-of-the-hour. Our changing times require modern law with much wider ambit for accountability, transparency, etc. in all aspects to ensure speedy justice for all children’s.