Punishment vs. Reform: How the Juvenile Justice System Actually Works

This paper examines the tension between retribution and rehabilitation within the juvenile justice system, analyzing how Indian criminal jurisprudence balances public security against the ethical mandate to reform child offenders. Focusing on the evolution of statutory criminal capacity, the study traces the doctrine of doli incapax from Sections 82 and 83 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) to Sections 20 and 21 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). It evaluates the application of conditional criminal liability for young children, using extreme anomalies such as the case of Amarjeet Sada to illustrate how the legal framework shifts the focus from punitive sentencing to welfare intervention under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. Furthermore, the paper examines the dual-layered mechanism established following the 2012 Delhi gang rape case, which empowers Juvenile Justice Boards to conduct preliminary assessments for adolescents aged 16 to 18 who commit heinous offenses. By distinguishing between immature children suited for institutional rehabilitation in Special Homes and adult-minded perpetrators subjected to regular trials, the study demonstrates how Indian law maintains a precise statutory equilibrium between public safety, accountability, and the reformative potential of developing minds