Monday, January 16, 2017

JUVENILE JUSTICE PROVISIONS IN INDIA

The first law on juvenile justice in India is came into force in 1850. According to this law children between 10 – 18 years will be convicted in courts and they will be given vocational training for their rehabilitation.

OVERVIEW:  The Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the United Nations in 1948 laid stress on the importance of the child. It was maintained that motherhood and children are entitled to special care and assistance and every child shall enjoy the special protection. The child must be fed, nourished and protected against every form of exploitation and must be given all means for his normal development. The Government of India adopted the National Policy Resolution for children in 1974 which emphasized that children who are socially handicapped, delinquent or had been forced to take to begging should be provided facilities for education, training and rehabilitation so that they might become useful citizens.
But the problem of juvenile delinquency is gradually increasing due to various factors such as population, occupational and cultural variations etc. This problem is worldwide. Even in developed countries juvenile crimes increased every year. In India a total of 44000 crimes were committed under the IPC by the juvenile and youthful offenders. It was therefore, necessary to bring them back into society as decent law abiding citizens. Thus, the National Law Policy implemented various Children Acts in the country. These acts includes special handling to juveniles by police, separate arrangements for trial and processing of juveniles.

PREVAILING JUVENILES LAWS: Section 82 and 83 of IPC provides a special consideration for children of immature understanding. Under the age of seven , a child is doli incapax (deemed incapable of forming the intent to commit a crime or tort, especially by reason of age) as per presumption of law. If a child is above 7 years and under 12 years of age and it is proved that he did not know the natural and physical consequences of his conduct, it should not be treated as an offence. Section 399 of Crpc provides that when any person under 15 years , sentenced by criminal court to imprisonment, the court might direct that such person would be sent to any reformatory school where there are means of discipline and of training in some useful industry. Section 562 made provision for person under 21 years for release on probation of good conduct.
The first special law was the Reformatory School Act, 1876 which was modified in 1997. It was provided that a child found guilty should be detained in such schools for a period of 3-7 years. The Indian Jails Committee 1919-1920 emphasized separate treatment of children and youthful offenders for their reformation.
Further the Indian Government enacted a Children Act in 1960 which introduced some new features. One important provision was the set up of Juvenile Court. The purpose of juvenile court is not to punish but to help a child in trouble. States lay down special qualification of child welfare and psychology for the appointments of a juvenile court magistrate. The children’s court deals with those who come in conflict with law and Child Welfare Board deals with children who are found neglected and uncontrollable.
With the establishment of juvenile courts an entirely new procedure was introduced. The basic idea is that of guardianship of the state. The juvenile offenders are not treated as criminals but the ward of the state and receives care and protection. Some Children Act provides that the police should appear in the juvenile court in plain clothes so that the child may not have any fear in his mind. As a rule, children are not to be handcuffed by the police. The Saurashtra Children Act provided for a ban on the entrance of a lawyer in the juvenile court but the Gujrat High Court in Mansing v. The state of Gujrat (1969) 10 Guj.L.A.66 [i] struct down Section 22 of the Saurashtra Children Act 1954 which prevented a legal practitioner from appearing in any case before the juvenile court. In its verdict the court opined that this provision violate the article 22(1) of Constitution which confers on a person the fundamental right to be defended by legal practitioner of his own choice.
The Children Act provides for the setting up remand or observation homes for children’s safety while their cases are pending before the juvenile courts.

NEED OF JUVENILE JUSTICE ACT 2015: In the wake of Delhi Gang Rape (16 dec, 2012), [ii] the law suffered a nationwide criticism owing to its helplessness against crimes where juveniles get involved in heinous crimes like rape and murder. In 2015, both the houses of Parliament amended the Bill, that lowered the juvenile age to 16 and proposed adult like treatment for juveniles accused of heinous crimes. After the 2012 Delhi Gang Rape, it was found that one of the accused was a few months away from being 18. So, he was tried in a juvenile court. On July 31, 2013 Subramanian Swamy files a PIL in Supreme Court seeking that the boy to be tried as an adult.
The Juvenile Justice (care and protection of children) Act, 2000 provides the framework to deal with children who are in conflict with law and children in need of care and protection. This Act was facing implementation issues and procedural delays with regard to adoption etc. There was increase in crimes committed by juveniles of 16-18 years age. Under this Act, any child offender may spend a maximum of 3 years in institutional care or special homes. They were not given any penalty higher than 3 years ,not be tried as an adult and be sent to an adult jail. But the new law treats all the children below 18 years and who commits a heinous offence as an adult. The Juvenile Justice Boards shall assess the child’s mental and physical capacity and on its basis decide whether the child is fit to be as an adult.
The new Bill also outlined the detailed procedures for adoption and introduces a provision for inter- country adoption so that prospective parents living outside the country can adopt a child in India. The Bill focused on the children need of care and protection. A child who found orphaned, abandoned or surrendered is brought before a Child Welfare Committee within 24 hours. On the special investigation report, the Committee decides whether to send the children to their own homes or any other facility it deems fit or to declare the child to be free for adoption or foster care.
Also various penalties for committing offences against children are laid out in the Bill. These includes giving a child an intoxicating substance punishable with seven years imprisonment and one lakh fine and selling or buying a child will be punishable with five years of imprisonment and one lakh rupees. The Bill introduces Foster Care. Families will sign up for foster care and abandoned orphaned children or those in conflict with law will be sent to them. Such families shall be monitored and shall receive financial aid from the State. In this context, disabled children and children of physically and financially incapable will be given priority.
The Act also modified section 77 that if a person gives to any child any intoxicating liquor or any narcotic drug or tobacco products except on the order of duly qualified medical practitioner, shall be punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extent to seven years and one lakh fine. It also provided that all child care institutions whether Governmental or non-Governmental, are to be mandatorily registered under this Act within six months from the date of the commencement of the Act. Stringent penalty is imposed in case of non-compliance.

CRITICISM: Under Juvenile Justice Act 2015, juveniles between the age of 16-18 years of age when found guilty of committing heinous offences by the Juvenile Justice Board will be sent to a children’s court that can pronounce the child guilty. Such juveniles can be detained in a place of safety until they reach the age of 21. If still found not reformed by 21, they can be sent to jails housing adults. But at present most states do not have the place of safety or Borstals. In some states juveniles sent to regular jails where reformation if always in doubt. It is really unfortunate that out of all the vices that has transpired in Indian soil, we today find our children as our greatest enemies. It is the world of darkness that grab them in crimes. There is need to show light to them.

CONCLUSION: The new Act provides great provisions for the adoption of the children for their benefit. Moreover, strict registration of child welfare institutions guaranteed the complete protection of abandoned children. The provision to treat 16-18 years of age as adult is good as per today’s changing society, this age group is mature enough to understand and differentiate between the right and wrong.


“WEARING A SUIT DOESN’T MAKE YOU MATURE OR KNOWLEDGEEABLE. IT ONLY MAKES YOU SEEMS SO TO PEOPLE WHO ARE IMMATURE AND IGNORANT”.




[i] Mansing v. The state of Gujrat (1969) 10 Guj.L.A.66
[ii] Delhi Gang Rape (16 dec, 2012)

                                                                                     COMPILED BY:
                                                                        VANITA BANSAL (ADVOCATE)
                                                                        B.A.LL.B                  

Thursday, March 17, 2016

DAUGHTERS LEGAL RIGHTS TO INHERIT THE FATHER’S PROPERT


 Succession is occasioned for properties of Hindu Undivided Families when there is partition in the family or when a male coparcener dies leaving daughters. The HINDU SUCCESSION ACT, 1956   originally did not give daughters inheritance rights in ancestral property. They could only ask for a right to substenence from a joint Hindu family. But this disparity was removed by an amendment to the Act on September 9, 2005. It was a landmark amendment to the HINDU SUCCESSION ACT, 1956. Which originally denied women the right to inherit ancestral property ruled that a Hindu woman or a girl will have equal property rights alongwith her male relatives for any partition made in ancestral property.
The HINDU SUCCESSION (AMENDMENT) ACT,2005, amended sections 4,6,23,and 30 of HINDU SUCCESSION ACT. It revised rules on coparcenary property giving daughters of the deceased equal rights with sons and subjecting them to the same liabilities and disablities. The amendment essentially furthers equal rights between males and females in legal system.
Before the enactment of the HINDU SUCCESSION ACT,1956 Hindus were covered by Shastric and customary laws that varied from region to region. Under the Mitakshara School of Hindu Law, a woman in a joint Hindu Family had the right only of maintenance but not to inherit the property. Consequently, if a partition took place in the coparcenary property, then each male coparcener was entitled to a share but the daughters did not get any share as one of the heirs on the death of coparcener.

PROVISIONS OF HINDU SUCCESSION (AMENDMENT) ACT, 2005:
Section 6 (1) of Hindu Succession Act provides in a joint Hindu Family , the daughter of coparcener shall by birth become a coparcener in her own right in the same manner as the son. She shall have the same rights in the coparcenary property as she would have had if she had been a son and she shall be subject to the same liabilities in respect of the said property.
Section 6(2) property shall be held her with incidents of coparcenary ownership. And property is capable of being disposed of by her testamentary disposition.
Section 6 (3) provides where a Hindu dies after the commencement of Hindu Succession Amendment Act 2005, his interest in the property of joint family, shall devolve by testamentary of intestate succession. Property shall be deemed to have been divided as if a partition has taken place and daughter is allotted the same share as son. The share of the pre-deceased son or pre-deceased daughter, as they would have got had they been alive at the time of the partition, shall be allotted to the surviving children of such pre-deceased son or daughter.
Section 6(4) no court shall recognize any right to proceed against a son, grandson or great grandson for the recovery of any debt due from his father, grandfather or great grandfather.
Section 6(5) provides that partition means any partition made by execution of a deed of partition duly registered under the Registration Act, 1908 or partition effected by a decree of a court.
Section 6(6) provides that nothing shall apply to a partition which has been effected before the 20/12/2004.
In CT Vs Maharani Raj Laxmi Devi, ..For[i] the purpose of partition of HUF, Section 6 of HINDU SUCCESSION ACT would govern the right of the parties, however so far as the INCOME TAX LAW is concerned , the matter has to be governed by Section 17(1).
Section 8 .. The property of male Hindu dying intestate shall devolve as per the provisions given below:
·      Firstly amongst the heirs of class I.
·      If no heirs in Class I then Class II.
·      If no heirs in both classes then amongst agnates of the deceased.
·      Lastly if no agnates then amongst the cognates of the deceased.

                 Class I heir
·      – Son
·      – Son of Predeceased son.
·      – Son of Predeceased son of Prede­ceased son.
·      – Widow
·      – Widow of Predeceased son
·      – Widow of Predeceased son of Predeceased son
·      – Mother
·      – Daughter
·      – Son of Predeceased Daughter.
·      – Daughter of Predeceased Daugh­ter.
·      – Daughter of Predeceased Son
·      – Daughter of Predeceased Son of Predeceased Son.
·      – Son of Predeceased Daughter of Predeceased Daughter.
·      – Daughter of Predeceased Daughter of Predeceased Daughter.
·      – Daughter of Predeceased Son of Predeceased Daughter.
·      – Daughter of Predeceased Daugh­ter of Predeceased Son.
        Class II heir
·      –      Father
·      –        Son’s Daughter’s Son.
·      –        Son’s Daughter’s Daughter.
·      –        Brother.
·      –        Sister.
·      –        Daughter’s Son’s Son.
·      –        Daughter’s Son’s Daughter.
·      –        Daughter’s Daughter’s Son.
·      –        Daughter’s Daughter’s Daughter.
·      –        Brothers Son.
·      –        Sister’s Son.
·      –        Brothers Daughter.
·      –        Sister’s Daughter.
·      –        Father’s Father, Father’s Mother.
·      –        Father’s Widow.
·      –        Brothers Widow.
·      –        Father’s Brother.
·      –        Father’s Sister.
·      –        Mothers Father.
·      –        Mothers Mother.
·      –        Mother’s Brother.
·      –        Mothers Sister.

·      Agnates of the deceased are relatives from the parental side. ‘A Person is said to be an agnate of another if the two are related to blood or adoption wholly through males’.

·      Cognates of the deceased are relatives through maternal side. ‘A person is said to be cognate of the deceased if the two are relative by blood and adoption not wholly through the males’.


Distribution of property  – Section 10
Following are the rules provided for the distribution of property among class I heirs:-
Rule 1- Intestate’s widow – one share [if he had more than 1 widow then also 1 share in total]
Rule 2 – Surviving sons, daughters & mother of deceased –one share each
Rule 3- The heirs in the branch of each predeceased son or each predeceased daughter of the intestate shall take between them one share.
Rule 4- The distribution of the share referred to in rule 3 –
–         Amongst the heirs in the branch of the predeceased son shall be so made that his widow (or widows) together and his surviving sons and daughter get equal portions; and the branch of his predeceased son gets the same portion;
–         Amongst the heir in the branch of predeceased daughter shall so made that the surviving sons and daughter get equal portions.
CONSEQUENCES OF AMENDMENT OF THE ACT:
Daughter shall be coparcener of Hindu Family Property. If a Hindu dies, the coparcener property shall be allotted to the daughter as is allotted to sons. If a female coparcener dies before partition, then children of such female would eligible for allotment assuming a partition taken place immediately before her demise. No recovery is made for ancestors dues from sons, grandson or great grandson by applying doctrine of pious obligation. A female member can also seek partition of the dwelling house where the family resides. A widow of a pre-deceased son even though remarried is now eligible for share in property as legal heir of the pre-deceased son of the family. A female can also dispose of her share in coparcener property at her own will.

The law, which gave equal right to daughters in ancestral property under the Hindu Succession Act, is prospectively enforceable and not with retrospective effect , the Supreme Court declared in its recent verdict.
Prakash v Phulavati[ii] 

The Karnataka High Court had held that daughters would be entitled to equal share even if father had died prior to September 9, 2005, when litigations over partition were pending in courts.

The defendants-appellants have questioned the Judgment and Order of the High Court with the contention that the amended provision of Section 6 has no application in the present case. Father of the plaintiff died on 18th February, 1988 and was thus, not a coparcener on the date of commencement of the Amendment Act. The plaintiff could not claim to be “the daughter of a coparcener” at the time of commencement of the Act which was the necessary condition for claiming the benefit

The amendments of 2005 gave equal right to daughters in coparcener properties by removing the discrimination that existed in the original enactment, the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 against Hindu women on rights over ancestral properties.

The Apex Court said that the rights under the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 are applicable to living daughters of living coparceners)as on September 9, 2005
“The text of the 2005 amendment, itself clearly provides that the right conferred on a ‘daughter of a coparcener’ is ‘on and from the commencement’ of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005.”

“We are unable to find any reason to hold that birth of the daughter after the amendment was a necessary condition for its applicability. All that is required is that daughter should be alive and her father should also be alive on the date of amendment,” the Apex Court said.

 Parameswari @ Gnanasakthi v Raja Ratinam and Others..[iii] the case related to a daughter married before March 25, 1989, laying a claim to half share as against one-fourth share, which was conceded as her share of her father's share on his death prior to the central amendment. It was decided that the claimant was married before the State Amendment Act. The view expressed, hereinbefore, is in conformity with this decision. It is only where no succession has taken place between March 25, 1989, and December 25, 2004, both married and unmarried daughters were on a par till the date of succession on or after December 25, 2004, so that the married daughter's share would get enlarged because of the central amendment and not in a case where there is succession during the interregnum between the State and Central amendments.
COMPILED BY:
VANITA BANSAL(ADVOCATE)
B.A.LL.B





[i] CT Vs  Maharani Raj Laxmi Devi (1997) 224 ITR 582(SC)
[ii] Prakash v Phulavati 

[iii] Parameswari @ Gnanasakthi v Raja Ratinam and Others (2010) (5) CTC 51,