Charitable institutions must register under the JJ Act but are not classified as 'child care institutions', affirming state responsibility for children's welfare without compromising institutional autonomy.

1. Orphanages, though a sad reflection on our society, all the same functions unselfishly to look after orphans and other destitute children; who, otherwise, would be thrown to the streets and turn into vagabonds, harmfully exposed to the vagaries of a cruel life. The petitioners herein are such institutions registered under the Orphanages and Other Charitable Homes (Supervision and Control) Act, 1960 (for brevity "Orphanages Act"). These institutions have been carried on with the hard earned money of well intentioned promoters, philanthropists and funds borrowed and begged. With the advent of the Juvenile Justice Care and Protection of Children Act, 2015 ('JJ Act of 2015' for short); under which, the authorities claim all these institutions are covered, such charitable activities for orphaned and destitute children stands extinguished, is the compelling argument raised by the petitioners. The writ petitions seek a declaration to absolve the petitioner - institutions from such coverage. The petitioners would be unable to satisfy the norms and standards as prescribed in the Juvenile Justice Care and Protection of Children Model Rules, 2016 (for short 'Model Rules'). If the JJ Act of 2015 and the Model Rules are upheld by this Court and the petitioner institutions are found to be brought within its ambit; then, the petitioners have no option but to close down their institutions. The children that the institutions have taken into their fold, who have been cared for all these years; again, would be thrown to calamitous adversities, goes the argument.

2. I have heard learned Senior Counsel K. Jayakumar, instructed by Advocate Firoz K., Advocates Litto Palathingal and Sam Isaac Pothiyil for the petitioners, Sri. N. Nagaresh, learned Assistant Solicitor General (ASG) representing Union of India along with Sri. K. A. Balan, Central Government Counsel and Sri. N. Manoj Kumar, Special Government Pleader representing the State.

3. The petitioners contend that the juvenile justice system originated with the intention of dealing with juvenile delinquency. A minor child, not conversant with the affairs of human society, are unable to perceive the rights and wrongs of the society and when involved in a delinquency, has to be dealt with carefully, with kid gloves so to speak, ensuring reformation and reintegration into society. The laws penalizing such offences against society as also the punishments prescribed, should not be imposed with the same rigour.

4. The learned Senior Counsel briefly puts in perspective the history of juvenile justice in the country and the international practices. In India, it is pointed out, the problem posed by juvenile delinquency was first addressed by the Apprentices Act, 1850 and the Reformatory Schools Act, 1897. The report of the Indian Jail Committee (1919-1920) emphasized the need for proper treatment of young offenders, which led to the Children Act of 1920 in Madras, followed by the Bengal and Bombay Acts of 1922 and 1924. The Children Act, 1960 catered to the Union Territories. The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 ('JJ Act of 2000' for short) was enacted to comply with India's obligations under international law by virtue of being a signatory to the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child (U.N. - CRC). The legislation itself was intended at incorporating into domestic laws, the U.N. Standard Minimum Rules for Administration of Juvenile Justice (known as the Beijing Rules) and the U.N. Rules for the protection of juveniles deprived of their liberty; which is now superseded by the JJ Act of 2015.

5. The JJ Act