LLM Notes: Judicial Perspective on Juvenile Justice in India: Latest Supreme Court Judgments

 Key Judicial Principles and Trends

Recent Supreme Court judgments reaffirm the judiciary’s commitment to a rehabilitative and child-centric approach under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (JJ Act). The Court has prioritized the welfare, reform, and reintegration of juveniles, emphasizing that justice for children in conflict with the law must not be derailed by procedural technicalities or systemic failures.

Summary Table: Key Judicial Directions and Judgments (2024–2025)

Principle/Issue	Judicial Stand (2024–2025)	Name of Judgment / Citation
Retrospective application	Juvenile laws apply retrospectively; plea of juvenility can be raised at any stage	Om Prakash @ Israel @ Raju Das v. State of Uttarakhand (2025 INSC 43).
Plea of juvenility	Can be raised at any stage, even after final disposal; courts must conduct proper inquiry	Rahul Kumar Yadav v. State of Bihar (April 2024).
Erasure of juvenile records	Mandatory erasure of juvenile conviction records to protect future prospects, barring statutory exceptions	SLP(CRL.) No. 851/2025 (2025 SC).
Procedural lapses by lower courts	Criticized; substantive justice prioritized over technicalities; courts must go beyond formalities	Om Prakash @ Israel @ Raju Das v. State of Uttarakhand (2025 INSC 43).
Impact on future prospects	Juvenile records must not affect adult life opportunities; authorities barred from disclosure in certificates	SLP(CRL.) No. 851/2025 (2025 SC).

Highlights from Judgments

• Om Prakash @ Israel @ Raju Das v. State of Uttarakhand (2025 INSC 43):
  The Supreme Court held that the plea of juvenility can be raised at any stage, even after final disposal, and that courts must prioritize substantive justice over procedural technicalities. The Court ordered the release and rehabilitation of a man who had spent 25 years in prison for a crime committed at age 14, highlighting systemic failures and the need for judicial vigilance.

• LOKESH KUMAR Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH & Another SLP(CRL.) No. 851/2025 (2025 SC):
  The Court directed that all records of a juvenile conviction, except as allowed under the JJ Act, must be erased to prevent any adverse impact on future opportunities. It quashed a character certificate that disclosed a juvenile conviction and reiterated the protective mandate of Section 24 of the JJ Act, 2015.

• Rahul Kumar Yadav v. State of Bihar (April 2024):
  The Supreme Court clarified that the plea of juvenility is not subject to limitation and can be raised at any stage of proceedings. The Court emphasized that a hyper-technical approach must be avoided and that courts are duty-bound to conduct a proper inquiry based on medical and documentary evidence.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s recent jurisprudence, as seen in Om Prakash @ Israel @ Raju Das v. State of Uttarakhand, SLP(CRL.) No. 851/2025, LOKESH KUMAR Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH & Another ,and Rahul Kumar Yadav v. State of Bihar, underscores a robust, reformative approach to juvenile justice in India. The judiciary has prioritized the child’s right to rehabilitation, strict enforcement of statutory protections, and correction of lower court errors to ensure that the spirit of the Juvenile Justice Act is fully realized in both letter and practice.

Print Page