Justice A Badharudeen made the observation while hearing Vinod Vikraman Pillai’s petition in Kerala High Court
The plea alleged violations of Sections 15A and 15B of the Kerala Abkari Act over liquor sales to people below 23
The Court said legislators should consider reducing the age for juveniles and children in conflict with law to 16 years
The Kerala High Court has observed that lawmakers should consider reducing the age threshold for juveniles and children in conflict with the law from 18 to 16 years. It linked that view to what it described as the increasing maturity of children by the age of 16.
Justice A Badharudeen made the observation while hearing a petition that alleged the authorities had failed to prevent the sale and supply of liquor to people below 23 in Kerala. The observation came in Vinod Vikrama Pillai v State of Kerala & Ors.
“That apart, it is high time for the legislatures to consider appropriate amendments in the statutes which deal with the ‘juveniles and child in conflict’ with law to reduce age to 16 years, taking note of the present trend showing sufficient maturity by children when they reach the age of 16," the Court observed. The petition was filed by journalist Vinod Vikraman Pillai and concerned alleged violations of Sections 15A and 15B of the Kerala Abkari Act.
Liquor Petition Claims
The petition centres on liquor sales. The petitioner alleged that licensed liquor establishments were serving alcohol to people below the age of 23 in violation of the Kerala Abkari Act. He argued that the authorities had failed to stop the practice.
The plea also referred to recent incidents involving people below 18 who allegedly caused fatal road accidents and other motor vehicle mishaps after consuming alcohol. It used those incidents to press for stricter enforcement of the law.
Among the cases cited was a fatal accident at Nedumbassery. The petition alleged that a 19-year-old driving a Mini Cooper under the influence of alcohol was involved in that crash.
Juvenile Law History
The law has changed over time. India’s juvenile justice framework did not always apply the same age limit to boys and girls. The current threshold of 18 years came through the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000.
Before that, the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986, was the first comprehensive central law aimed at creating a uniform juvenile justice system across the country. Under that law, a boy below 16 years and a girl below 18 years were treated as juveniles.
That distinction was later removed after India aligned its laws with international child-rights standards. The United Nations adopted the Convention on the Rights of the Child in 1989, which recognises every person below 18 years as a child unless the age of majority is reached earlier under applicable law. India ratified the convention in December 1992.
Parliament then enacted the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, replacing the 1986 law. The 2000 law fixed 18 years as the uniform age threshold for both boys and girls and stressed rehabilitation, reintegration and a child-friendly approach for children accused of offences.
Post-Delhi Rape Changes
The 2012 case changed the debate. Calls to lower the juvenile age threshold gathered pace after the December 2012 Delhi gang rape case. One of the accused in that case was a minor aged 17 at the time of the crime, which led to wider demands for stricter treatment of older minors accused of serious offences.
Parliament later enacted the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. The law came into force on January 15, 2016, replacing the 2000 Act, but it did not reduce the general age of juvenility from 18 to 16.
Instead, the 2015 law created a separate process for children aged 16 to 18 accused of heinous offences. Under Section 15, the Juvenile Justice Board can make a preliminary assessment of their mental and physical capacity to commit the alleged offence, their ability to understand its consequences and the circumstances in which it was allegedly committed.
After that assessment, the Board may transfer the case to a Children’s Court. The Children’s Court then decides whether the child should be tried as an adult.
