A Critical Review of Trying Juveniles as Adults for Severe Crimes in India

Abstract

The juvenile justice system in India has historically emphasized rehabilitation, but the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 introduced a provision to try juveniles aged 16-18 as adults for heinous offences, a shift driven largely by public outrage rather than empirical evidence. This systematic review critically evaluates the legal frameworks, empirical evidence, and policy implications of this practice. We aimed to synthesize findings on the effectiveness of juvenile transfer for public safety and accountability, identify factors influencing judicial decision-making, assess procedural and ethical challenges, and examine socio-legal forces shaping this punitive turn. Studies were selected based on pre-defined criteria, including peer-reviewed articles, official reports, and doctoral dissertations, with data extracted on study characteristics and key findings. The synthesized evidence reveals a significant gap between legislative intent and implementation reality: Children's Courts often operate with an adult criminal justice lens, judicial decisions are heavily influenced by offence severity rather than adolescent neurodevelopment, and the preliminary assessment process is inconsistently applied. Media and public opinion have powerfully shaped policy, while male juveniles from marginalized backgrounds are disproportionately transferred. The evidence suggests that trying juveniles as adults is not achieving its intended outcomes of enhanced public safety or accountability; instead, it undermines juvenile justice principles and risks long-term harm to vulnerable children. We conclude that this policy shift, rooted in populist punitiveness, requires urgent reconsideration, with future research prioritizing longitudinal studies to inform a reinvestment in child-centric, rehabilitative approaches.