Impact of Poverty and Social Inequality on Juvenile Crime in India

Written by: Dev Bansal, 4th Year B.A. LL.B. (Hons.), Lovely Professional University

court.

Introduction

Juvenile crime in India has been steadily increasing, raising serious questions about the effectiveness of the justice system and the socio-economic environment that shapes children’s lives. According to the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), a significant proportion of juveniles in conflict with the law come from marginalised sections of society, particularly from families living below the poverty line. Poverty not only deprives children of education and health but also pushes them into child labour, begging, substance abuse, and, in extreme cases, criminal activities.

Theories such as Strain Theory (Merton, 1938) and Social Disorganisation Theory (Shaw & McKay, 1942) suggest that when legitimate opportunities are blocked, children may resort to delinquent behavior as an alternative. In India, where vast socio-economic inequalities persist despite constitutional guarantees, the structural disadvantages faced by marginalized children often translate into higher rates of juvenile crime.

This paper explores how poverty and social inequality fuel juvenile delinquency in India, analyzes relevant laws and judicial interpretations, and suggests reforms for a more child-centric justice system.

Methodology

This research adopts a doctrinal and socio-legal methodology, combining:

1. Statutory Analysis – Examining the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, Indian Penal Code provisions, and other child-protection laws.

2. Case Law Review – Studying key judgments of the Supreme Court and High Courts on juvenile justice and socio-economic rights.

3. Secondary Sources – Utilizing NCRB data, government reports, UNICEF publications, and scholarly articles.

4. Comparative Perspective – Briefly comparing India’s approach with that of other jurisdictions to highlight policy gaps.

   
   

Analysis

1. Poverty and Juvenile Crime: The Socio-Legal Nexus

Children from poor households are often deprived of education and forced into child labor, begging, or hazardous work. This marginalization creates an environment conducive to petty theft, substance abuse, and participation in organized crime. The NCRB 2023 report indicates that nearly 80% of juveniles apprehended belonged to families earning less than ₹25,000 per month, highlighting the direct correlation between poverty and delinquency.

The Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 categorizes such children as “in need of care and protection,” yet the lack of rehabilitation facilities and systemic delays often result in punitive rather than reformative outcomes.

2. Social Inequality as a Determinant of Juvenile Delinquency

Beyond poverty, social inequality—based on caste, class, and gender—exacerbates the vulnerability of children. For instance:

• Caste Discrimination: Dalit and Adivasi children face exclusion from mainstream education, making them more susceptible to child labor and crime.

• Urban Inequality: Slum children are exposed to gang culture, drugs, and street crimes.

• Gender Inequality: Girls are often victims of trafficking, sexual exploitation, and forced labor, and when criminalized, they face harsher stigmatization.

The Right to Education Act, 2009 was introduced to address educational inequality, but high dropout rates among poor children (especially in rural areas) perpetuate the cycle of poverty and delinquency.

3. Statutory and Constitutional Framework

• Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Recognizes the principle of doli incapax (children under 7 are incapable of committing crime).

• Constitution of India – Articles 21A (Right to Education), 39(e) and 39(f) (protection of children), and 47 (nutrition and health) provide socio-economic rights.

• International Instruments – India is a signatory to the UNCRC (1989), which mandates child-friendly justice and protection from exploitation.

Despite these frameworks, the gap between law and implementation remains wide.

4. Judicial Approach

Indian courts have repeatedly recognized the link between socio-economic deprivation and juvenile delinquency.

• In Sheela Barse v. Union of India (1986), the Supreme Court stressed the need for separate juvenile homes and rehabilitation rather than incarceration.

• In Pratap Singh v. State of Jharkhand (2005), the Court emphasized the reformative aim of juvenile justice, especially for marginalized children.

• In Salil Bali v. Union of India (2013), the Court upheld the constitutionality of the JJ Act, reiterating that juvenile offenders must be treated differently from adults.

Judicial pronouncements highlight the importance of a child-friendly justice system, but implementation is hindered by lack of resources and socio-economic barriers

5. Comparative Perspective

Countries like Norway and Canada adopt restorative justice models, focusing on community service, counselling, and reintegration. In contrast, India’s system often emphasises institutionalisation, which, if not adequately funded, can become counterproductive. Learning from international best practices could help India shift towards a more rehabilitative approach.

6. Government Initiatives and Policy Gaps

Programs like the Integrated Child Protection Scheme (ICPS) and Skill India Mission aim to rehabilitate vulnerable children. However, poor coordination, corruption, and underfunding limit their effectiveness. A stronger focus on preventive welfare schemes—education, nutrition, healthcare—could reduce juvenile crime in the long term.

Conclusion

Poverty and social inequality are structural drivers of juvenile crime in India. While legal frameworks like the Juvenile Justice Act provide mechanisms for child protection, the absence of robust welfare measures, coupled with systemic inequalities, perpetuates delinquency. The criminalization of children from marginalized communities often reflects society’s failure rather than individual fault.

To address juvenile crime effectively, India must shift from a punitive model to a restorative and welfare-oriented approach, ensuring that every child, irrespective of socio-economic background, has access to education, healthcare, and dignity.

Recommendations

1. Strengthen Education Access – Ensure effective implementation of the RTE Act to prevent school dropouts.

2. Welfare-Oriented Justice – Expand rehabilitation centers with skill training, counseling, and family support.

3. Child-Friendly Policing – Train police officers in sensitivity towards juveniles from poor backgrounds.

4. Community Engagement – Involve NGOs and local communities in preventive child protection strategies.

5. Policy Integration – Coordinate poverty alleviation schemes with juvenile justice mechanisms for holistic outcomes.

   
   

References

• Merton, R. K. (1938). Social structure and anomie. American Sociological Review, 3(5), 672–682.

• Shaw, C. R., & McKay, H. D. (1942). Juvenile delinquency and urban areas. University of Chicago Press.

• National Crime Records Bureau (2023). Crime in India Report. Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India.

• Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.

• Sheela Barse v. Union of India, AIR 1986 SC 1773.

• Pratap Singh v. State of Jharkhand, (2005) 3 SCC 551.

• Salil Bali v. Union of India, (2013) 7 SCC 705.

• UNICEF (2021). The State of the World’s Children Report. United Nations.