Source: Rajasthan High Court

Why in News?

Recently, the Rajasthan High Court has held that the right to be forgotten by the destruction of juvenile delinquency records is an absolute right if the juvenile has been extended the benefits of Section 24 of the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (JJ Act).

• The aforesaid observation was made in the matter of Jitendra Meena v. State of Rajasthan.

What was the Background of Jitendra Meena v. State of Rajasthan Case?

• The respondents issued an advertisement dated 4^th December 2019 under the Rajasthan Police Subordinate Services Rules, 1989 for the post of Constable for various districts of the State.
• The petitioner, being eligible, submitted his application, in pursuance of the said advertisement.
• Thereafter, the petitioner participated in the examination and was declared successful in the same.
• The respondents issued a Press Note calling the successful candidates, including the present petitioner, for documents verification and medical test before the concerned authorities.
• Thereafter, the respondents issued a selection list of the candidates for the post in question, wherein the petitioner’s name was shown.
• Subsequently, the respondents declared the petitioner ineligible for the post in question on account of registration of a criminal case against him.
• Thus, being aggrieved by the same, the present petition has been filed before the Rajasthan High Court which was later allowed by the Court.

What were the Court’s Observations?

• The single-judge bench of Justice Dr. Pushpendra Singh Bhati observed that the right to be forgotten, regarding a Juvenile, where Section 24 of the JJ Act, shall remain a definite right and a juvenile, who has been given the benefit of Section 24 shall be entitled for erasure of his juvenile delinquency by not putting it on record anywhere, because creation or perpetuation of such record, may highlight a kind of embarrassment to the juvenile, which in turn, would certainly have an adverse impact on his future prospects, which includes a selection process for public employment, and goes against the legislative intention of juvenile laws.

What is Section 24 of the JJ Act?

About the Act:

• This Act came into force on January 15, 2016. It repealed the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000.
• This Act seeks to achieve the objectives of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Children as ratified by India on December 11, 1992.
• It specifies 58+procedural safeguards in cases of children in conflict with law.
• It seeks to address challenges in the existing Act such as delays in adoption processes, high pendency of cases, accountability of institutions, etc.
• The Act further seeks to address children in the 16-18 age group, in conflict with law, as an increased incidence of crimes committed by them have been reported over the past few years
• According to Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Amendment Act, 2021, crimes against children which are mentioned in the chapter “Other Offences Against Children” of the JJ Act, 2015 and that allows imprisonment between three and seven years will be deemed “non-cognizable”.

Section 24 of the Act:

About:

• This Section deals with the removal of disqualification on the findings of an offence.
• It states that —

(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, a child who has committed an offence and has been dealt with under the provisions of this Act shall not suffer disqualification, if any, attached to a conviction of an offence under such law.

Provided that in the case of a child who has completed or is above the age of sixteen years and is found to be in conflict with law by the Children’s Court under clause (i) of sub-section (1) of section 19, the provisions of sub-section (1) shall not apply.

(2) The Board shall make an order directing the Police, or by the Children’s Court to its own registry that the relevant records of such conviction shall be destroyed after the expiry of the period of appeal or, as the case may be, a reasonable period as may be prescribed.

Provided that in case of a heinous offence where the child is found to be in conflict with law under clause (i) of sub-section (1) of section 19, the relevant records of conviction of such child shall be retained by the Children’s Court.

• This Section is not only for excluding or erasing the criminal antecedent record, but goes a step forward, by laying down a provision that the criminal antecedent record of a juvenile be erased/destroyed completely, so that such previous conviction or criminal delinquency of a juvenile would not be carried forward, so as to prevent any adverse impact of his previous delinquency, upon his future prospects.

Case Law:

• In the case of Jorawer Singh Mundy @ Jorawar Singh Mundy v. Union of India and Ors. (2021), the Delhi High Court held that in the cases of juvenile delinquency, if any criminal antecedent record of a juvenile is allowed to remain intact, to be accessed, amongst others, by using the technology tools, the same may not only bring humiliation and discredit to the juvenile, but may also adversely impact the future prospects of the juvenile, among other things.