In my 13 years serving as an Additional Public Prosecutor in Maharashtra and my current role as counsel before the Bombay High Court, I have observed the term “child” being interpreted differently across courtrooms, often on the same day. In one instance, a 15-year-old boy is viewed as a child deserving protection and guidance in a juvenile court. Meanwhile, a 15-year-old girl working in a workshop might be legally employed under labor laws. Similarly, a 17-year-old girl, depending on the statute and judge, might be considered either a wife or a victim. The Indian legal system struggles with a fundamental question: who is considered a child?
The Constitutional Boundary at Age 14
The 86th Amendment to the Indian Constitution introduced Article 21A, making education a fundamental right. However, the corresponding Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, ensures free education only for children aged six to fourteen. On a child’s 14th birthday, this transformative right ceases. Many families unable to afford further education see their children discontinued from schooling, potentially leading them into criminal courts later.
Contradictions in Labor Laws
The Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Amendment Act, 2016, prohibits employing children under 14, aligning with the education mandate. However, it introduces the term “adolescent” for those aged 14 to 18, allowing them to work, except in hazardous jobs. This legal framework seems to push children towards work as soon as education is no longer state-funded.
Juvenile Justice and Labor Laws: A Clash
The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, classifies anyone under 18 as a child needing protection. Yet, labor laws classify a 15-year-old as an adolescent eligible for work. This duality raises a fundamental question: if a child can work at 14, why are they considered vulnerable until 18?
Inconsistent Age Criteria in Criminal Law
In criminal law, the age defining a “child” shifts based on whether they are accused or a victim. The Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the new Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, maintain that acts committed by children under seven are not offenses. Between ages seven and twelve, criminal responsibility depends on maturity (Section 83 IPC, Section 21 BNS).
More Read
However, being a victim alters age definitions. For instance, consent under age 12 is invalid (Section 90 IPC, Section 28 BNS). Kidnapping laws differ for boys under 16 and girls under 18 (Section 361 IPC, Section 137 BNS). The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO), defines a child as anyone under 18, offering clarity absent in other statutes.
Marriage Laws: A Legal Disparity
The Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006, sets marriageable ages at 18 for women and 21 for men. Personal laws, however, permit marriage at puberty, leading to conflicting court decisions. This disparity leaves young girls vulnerable to early marriage and deprives them of educational opportunities.
The Call for a Unified Legal Definition
The discrepancies across laws concerning child protection and development are problematic. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and Indian laws like the Juvenile Justice Act advocate for a unified definition of a child as anyone under 18. A consistent legal definition would ensure comprehensive protection and development opportunities for all children, irrespective of gender.
It is imperative that India establishes a uniform definition of “child” across relevant laws, allowing exceptions only where differing ages serve specific, justified purposes. This change would better align education, labor, and marriage laws, offering clear protection to India’s youth. The future of our nation depends on coherent and consistent child protection laws, and it is high time we address this issue.
