International Journal For Multidisciplinary Research
E-ISSN: 2582-2160
•
Impact Factor: 9.24
A Widely Indexed Open Access Peer Reviewed Multidisciplinary Bi-monthly Scholarly International Journal
Home
Research Paper
Submit Research Paper
Publication Guidelines
Publication Charges
Upload Documents
Track Status / Pay Fees / Download Publication Certi.
Editors & Reviewers
View All
Join as a Reviewer
Get Membership Certificate
Current Issue
Publication Archive
Conference
Publishing Conf. with IJFMR
Upcoming Conference(s) ↓
Conferences Published ↓
IC-AIRCM-T3-2026
SPHERE-2025
AIMAR-2025
SVGASCA-2025
ICCE-2025
Chinai-2023
PIPRDA-2023
ICMRS'23
Contact Us
Plagiarism is checked by the leading plagiarism checker
Call for Paper
Volume 8 Issue 2
March-April 2026
Indexing Partners
LANDMARK JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENT SHAPING JUVENILE JUSTICE IN INDIA
| Author(s) | Ms. Somya Singh, Mr. Alankit Sharma |
|---|---|
| Country | India |
| Abstract | Juveniles are considered children who have not attained the age of 18 years, or the age fixed by the law of that particular country. The determination of age is necessary in matters of crime, responsibility, and ascertaining liability. Juvenile Justice means providing adequate means and access to secure justice to those who don’t even know the meaning of crime. Although securing justice is not an easy task, and requires a rigorous process to secure the same. The evolution of juvenile justice in India has been significantly influenced by landmark judicial pronouncements that have redefined the scope of child rights and the treatment of juveniles within the criminal justice system. Cases such as Sheela Barse v. Union of India (1986) highlighted the need for humane conditions and speedy trials for juveniles, while Salil Bali v. Union of India (2013) and Dr. Subramanian Swamy v. Raju (2014) reinforced the principle of reformative justice and the protection of juveniles from harsh punitive measures. At the same time, the Mukesh v. State (Nirbhaya Case, 2017) indirectly triggered debates leading to the 2015 Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, which allowed juveniles aged 16–18 to be tried as adults in heinous offences, reflecting a shift towards balancing societal demand for deterrence with the constitutional ethos of rehabilitation. These landmark judgments have shaped the future of juvenile justice in our country, demonstrating the active tension between reformation and retribution, while underscoring the judiciary’s role in shaping a sensitive, rights-based juvenile justice framework in India. This Article is going to discuss some of the well-known cases that play a critical role in the evolution of the concept from 1986 to the current time, and what are all the key observations and loopholes are still present in the legal provisions. |
| Keywords | Juveniles, crime, Juvenile Justice, evolution, landmark judicial pronouncements, criminal justice system, Sheela Barse v. Union of India, Salil Bali v. Union of India, Dr. Subramanian Swamy v. Raju, Mukesh v. State, Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, reformation, retribution. |
| Published In | Volume 7, Issue 5, September-October 2025 |
| Published On | 2025-10-08 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.36948/ijfmr.2025.v07i05.57293 |
Share this

E-ISSN 2582-2160
CrossRef DOI is assigned to each research paper published in our journal.
IJFMR DOI prefix is
10.36948/ijfmr
Downloads
All research papers published on this website are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License, and all rights belong to their respective authors/researchers.
Powered by Sky Research Publication and Journals