More than 50,000 children in conflict with the law remain trapped in a sluggish justice system, with over half of all cases pending before the country’s 362 Juvenile Justice Boards (JJBs), according to a new study released by the India Justice Report (IJR).

Despite a decade since the Juvenile Justice Act came into force, the study reveals persistent gaps — including missing judges, poorly inspected child care homes, absence of structured data systems, and deep inequalities among states.

As of October 31, 2023, JJBs were handling 1,00,904 cases, of which 55% were pending. Pendency varied sharply across states, from 83% in Odisha to 35% in Karnataka. Although 92% of India’s districts have constituted JJBs, one in four boards is functioning without a full bench. Each board carries an average backlog of 154 cases.

The findings also coincide with data showing 40,036 juveniles apprehended in 2023 under IPC and special laws — three-fourths of them in the 16–18 age group.

The report further notes major weaknesses in the rehabilitation structure. Nearly 30% of JJBs lack legal aid clinics, while 14 states and Jammu & Kashmir have no “places of safety” for children above 18. Oversight of Child Care Institutions (CCIs) is inadequate — only 810 of the required 1,992 inspections were conducted across 166 homes.

A glaring data vacuum persists. With no national-level data grid for the juvenile justice system, IJR researchers filed over 250 RTI applications. Of more than 500 responses received, only 36% provided useful information, highlighting weak transparency.

Calling the findings a “warning sign,” IJR chief editor Maja Daruwala said the system depends on a regular flow of information, but “authorised oversight bodies neither receive it routinely nor insist on it.”

The report warns that scattered and inconsistent data has made supervision “episodic” and accountability hollow.

Dr. Tahir Rufayee, the National Chairman of the National Foundation for Journalism and Media (NFJM), greeted the nation on Universal Children’s Day, emphasizing the importance of safeguarding children’s rights and future. This observance, celebrated annually on November 20, serves as a reminder of our collective duty to prioritize every child’s dignity and well-being.

Acclaimed for his advocacy, Dr. Rufayee articulated, “Children are the hope and strength of the nation.” He highlighted the significance of nurturing environments that support their growth and development. The safety, education, health, and emotional wellness of children must remain at the forefront of societal concerns.

Addressing the critical role of the media, Dr. Rufayee pointed out that responsible journalism plays a vital part in highlighting children’s issues. By shedding light on these matters, the media can foster a more aware and compassionate society. He reaffirmed NFJM’s commitment to ethical journalism, promising to amplify voices concerned with child welfare.

In his message, Dr. Rufayee extended heartfelt greetings, calling for a renewed dedication to creating a future where “every child feels protected, valued, and empowered to achieve their dreams.” He urged all citizens to take proactive measures in ensuring a safe and supportive environment for children across the nation.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday struck down several provisions of the 2021 Tribunals Reforms law related to the appointment, tenure, and service conditions of members of various tribunals, saying they had been re-enacted by the Centre with minor tweaks.

A bench of Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran said the impugned provisions violated the principles of separation of powers and judicial independence, and they should not have been brought back.

The bench said that dealing with the backlog of cases was not the sole responsibility of the judiciary, and the onus must be shared by the other arms of the government.

The bench held that Parliament had sought to “legislatively override” binding judicial precedents by re-enacting clauses previously quashed by the court.

“We have compared the provisions of the Ordinance and the 2021 Act, and it shows that all provisions struck down, with minor tweaking, have been re-enacted again,” the CJI said while reading the judgment.

“Thus, we have held that the provisions of the 2021 Act cannot be sustained as it violates separation of powers and judicial independence. It amounts to legislative overriding without curing any defects and binding judgment… It falls foul. Thus, it is struck down as unconstitutional,” he said.

The court restored the earlier judicial directions on tenure, making it clear that members of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) and the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) shall continue to be in service until the age of 62, while their chairpersons or presidents shall remain in office until the age of 65.

The details of the judgment are awaited.

On November 11, the top court reserved its verdict on a batch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Tribunals Reforms (Rationalisation and Conditions of Service) Act, 2021.

The law abolished several appellate bodies, such as the Film Certification Appellate Tribunal, and amended provisions governing appointments, age criteria, and tenure across the tribunal framework. (Agencies)

In a major ruling reinforcing judicial independence, the Supreme Court on Wednesday struck down several provisions of the Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021 relating to the appointment, tenure, and service conditions of members of various tribunals. The Court observed that the Centre had reintroduced provisions earlier struck down by the judiciary, with only “minor tweaks,” amounting to a legislative override of binding judicial precedents.

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai and Justice K. Vinod Chandran held that the contested provisions violated the basic principles of separation of powers and judicial independence.

“We have compared the provisions of the Ordinance and the 2021 Act, and it shows that all provisions struck down, with minor tweaking, have been re-enacted again,” the CJI observed while pronouncing the verdict. “Thus, we have held that the provisions of the 2021 Act cannot be sustained… It amounts to legislative overriding without curing any defects. It falls foul. Thus, it is struck down as unconstitutional.”

The Court also underlined that clearing the judiciary’s mounting pendency is a shared responsibility and “not the sole obligation of the courts.”

Earlier Directions Restored

The bench restored previous judicial guidelines regarding tenure and retirement age. Members of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) and the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) will continue in service until the age of 62, while their chairpersons and presidents will remain in office until 65.

Further details of the judgment are awaited.

Context

The Supreme Court had reserved its judgment on November 11 on a batch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Tribunals Reforms (Rationalisation and Conditions of Service) Act, 2021.

The legislation had abolished several appellate bodies, including the Film Certification Appellate Tribunal, and introduced major changes to the appointment process, qualifications, and tenure of tribunal members—changes that have now largely been invalidated by the Supreme Court.