Juvenile Delinquency

Etimologically, the term ‘delinquency’ has been derived from the Latin word delinquer which means ‘to omit’. The Romans used the term to refer to the failure of a person to perform the assigned task or duty. It was William Coxson who in 1484, used the term ‘delinquent’ to describe a person found guilty of customary offence. The word also found place in Shakespearean famous play ‘Macbeth’ in 1605. In simpler words it may be said that delinquency is a form of behaviour or rather misbehaviour or deviation from the generally accepted norms of conduct in the society.

However, penologists have interpreted the word “juvenile delinquency” differently. Generally speaking, the term refers to a large variety of disapproved behaviours of children and adolescents which the society does not approve of, and for which some kind of admonition, punishment or corrective measure is justified in the public interest.

Thus, the term has a very extensive meaning and includes rebellious and hostile behaviour of children and their attitude of indifference towards society. Certain other acts such as begging, truancy, vagrancy, obscenity, loitering, pilfering, drinking, gambling etc. which vicious persons very often commit are also included within the meaning of the term juvenile delinquency.

It may therefore, be inferred that a juvenile is an adolescent person between childhood and manhood or womanhood, as the case may be, who indulges in some kind of anti-social behaviour, which if not checked, may turn him into a potential offender.

Expressing his view on juvenile delinquency, Albert Cohen observed that the only possible definition of delinquency is one that relates to the behaviour in question to some set of rules. The rules themselves are a heterogeneous collection of regulations, some common to all communities and others only to be found in one or two. Caldwell prefers to leave the term vague and includes within it all acts of children which tend them to be pooled indiscriminately as wards of the State.

Mrs. Ruth Shonle Cavan (USA) observed that “irrespective of legal definition, a child might be regarded as delinquent when his anti-social conduct inflicts suffering upon others or when his family finds him difficult to control and he becomes a serious concern of the community.”

Some critics argue that the statutes defining the various delinquent acts are vague in terms of their contents because they are contrary to the fundamental principle of criminal law as expressed through the Latin maxim nullum crimen sine lege, which means an act cannot be a crime unless it is so defined under the existing law.

The idea is that there should be certainty about acts which are prescribed as crimes. For example, a child or an adolescent who is growing up in idleness or wanders about the street in late night without any purpose or is habitually disobedient or uncontrolled, is deemed to be a delinquent under certain statutes.

This is obviously not in strict accordance with the definition of crime but such conducts are still treated as delinquent acts under the statutes relating to juveniles because they are created not to punish them but to keep them away from such indecent and lascivious conducts which are detrimental to the development of their personality.

In a broad generic sense, juvenile delinquency refers to “a variety of anti-social behavior of a child and is defined somewhat differently by different societies, though a common converging tendency may be noted in those forms, namely, socially unacceptable tendency of the child at any given time.”

It may be noted that a great variety of acts included within the term ‘juvenile delinquency’ are otherwise non-criminal in nature and are freely tolerated, if done by adults. For example, smoking, drinking or absenting oneself from home may be a permissible conduct for adults but the same is treated as a delinquent act, if committed by children or adolescents.

It is sometimes argued that delinquency is not a criminal status. But this view has been repelled by Paul W. Tappen who asserts that euphemistic terminology such as “hearing” instead of “trial”, or “disposition” instead of “sentence” should not conceal from us the fact that nature of entire procedure may be little different from that of a criminal court, but it may be even worse, for it may abandon the fundamentals of justice in the guise of promoting superior justice.

The question of exact definition of juvenile delinquency has always remained a debatable issue among criminologists. It has been engaging the attention of United Nations for quite some time. The Second United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders held in August, 1960 in London, took up the problem of juvenile delinquency, and the concensus was that the issue of definition need not be stretched too far and the meaning of the term ‘juvenile delinquency’ be restricted to all violations of criminal law and maladjusted behaviours of minors which are disapproved by society.

The General Assembly of the United Nations adopted the Convention on Rights of the Child on 20th November, 1989 which prescribed a set of standard to be adhered to by all the State parties in securing the best interest of the child. The Convention also emphasised on social reintegration of child victims, to the extent possible, without resorting to judicial proceedings.

The Government of India ratified the Convention on 11th December, 1992 and therefore, it became expedient to re-enact the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 to meet the requirements of the standard prescribed by the Convention on the Right of the Child and all other international instruments. It is in this backdrop that the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 was enacted repealing the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986.

In the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, the term ‘delinquent juvenile’ used in the earlier Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 has been substituted by the words ‘juvenile in conflict with law. It is therefore, obvious that every conduct prohibited by statute is not to be taken as an act of delinquency.

Instead, the conduct which tends to constitute an offence, not only from the legal standpoint but also from the angle of prevalent social norms and values shall be included within the meaning of the term ‘delinquency’. For example, smoking, begging, vagrancy, etc. being harmful for the growing children are intended to be controlled by the enforcement of the Act.

Similarly, the children who are incorrigible, uncontrollable, destitute or orphans etc. and need active support and care of the community, and who were termed as ‘neglected children’ under the repealed Juvenile Justice Act of 1986, have been called as ‘children in need of care and protection’, under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 which came into force on December 30, 2000. Under the Act, ‘juvenile’ or ‘child’ means a person who has not completed eighteenth year of age, be he a boy or a girl.