Special Juvenile Police Unit's escorted movement of juvenile accused permitted under Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 and Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, subject to strict protective measures to prevent stigma and trauma.
In a significant judgment dated September 15, 2026, the Kerala High Court, presided over by Justice G. Girish, has affirmed the legality of permitting escorted movement of Children-in-Conflict with Law (CCLs) by the Special Juvenile Police Unit (SJPU) for the purpose of collecting evidence, while emphasizing the need for strict adherence to child-friendly procedures and safeguards.
The case arose from allegations against four juveniles accused of a serious crime involving murder and theft in Harippad. Following their apprehension and lodging in an Observation Home, the Investigating Officer sought permission from the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) to have the CCLs accompany police officials to various locations for recovery of stolen property, identification by witnesses, and collection of other evidence. The JJB, after careful consideration, allowed such escorted movement subject to 13 stringent safeguards designed to prevent physical or mental trauma, ensure privacy, and avoid public or media exposure.
The petitioners challenged this order arguing that such movement amounted to illegal police custody or custodial interrogation prohibited under the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 ("JJ Act"), and that the procedures under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 ("BSA") could not override the special protections granted to juveniles. They also raised concerns about possible stigma and violation of privacy under Section 74 of the JJ Act.
Rejecting the petitioners' contentions, the Court held that:
- - The non-obstante clause in Section 1(4) of the JJ Act does not preclude application of other procedural laws like the BSA when conducted in consonance with the JJ Act's protective principles.
- - The concept of `custody' under Section 27 of the Evidence Act (incorporated via Section 23(2) BSA) includes functional custody, which may extend to escorted movement for evidence collection, provided it is carried out with child-friendly safeguards and without causing mental or physical harm.
- - The JJ Act does not grant immunity from investigation to CCLs but regulates the manner of investigation to ensure care and protection.
- - The presence of Legal Cum Probation Officer (LCPO) and Child Welfare Officer during interviews and escorted movement mitigates risks of coercion or harassment.
- - The 13 safeguards imposed by the JJB, including use of non-government vehicles, prohibition of uniforms, restriction on media presence, confidentiality of dates and times, medical examination before and after movement, and prohibition of public exposure, effectively prevent stigma and preserve dignity.
- - The escorted movement is analogous to the procedures envisaged under Sections 95(2) and 95(3) of the JJ Act for transferring juveniles between institutions, thereby recognized in law.
The Court further clarified that child-friendly interviews conducted in a controlled environment do amount to a diluted form of custodial interrogation permissible under the law, citing Rule 8(3)(v) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Model Rules, 2016. The Court underscored that the prohibition against placing CCLs in police lock-ups or jails does not bar carefully regulated escorted movement or interviews designed to avoid any feeling of custody or trauma.
This judgment thus strikes a balance between the need for effective criminal investigation and the statutory mandate to protect the rights and welfare of juveniles in conflict with law. It provides clear guidance to investigating agencies, Juvenile Justice Boards, and child welfare authorities on conducting evidence collection involving juveniles without violating their rights or dignity.
In conclusion, the Kerala High Court dismissed the revision petition, upholding the Juvenile Justice Board's order permitting the escorted movement of the juveniles with strict conditions, reiterating that such procedures are lawful and consistent with both the JJ Act and the BSA.
Bottom Line:
Juvenile Justice - Escorted movement of Children-in-Conflict with Law (CCL) for evidence collection is permissible under the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, provided child-friendly procedures and safeguards are strictly adhered to.
Statutory provision(s):
Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 Sections 10, 15, 74, 95(2), 95(3); Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 Section 23(2); Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Model Rules, 2016 Rule 8(3)(v)
XXXXXXXXXX v. State of Kerala, (Kerala) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2979330
