Sampurna Behura v. Union of India

Facts

• A PIL was filed highlighting that across several states, juveniles in conflict with law were being kept in regular jails and police lockups instead of observation homes.
• It was alleged that the infrastructure and care standards prescribed under the JJ Act 2015 remained largely on paper.
• The Supreme Court took cognizance of widespread non-compliance with juvenile protection standards.

Issues

1. Whether the protective provisions of the JJ Act 2015 regarding institutional care are mandatory or directory?
2. What remedial directions are required to ensure compliance?

Held

• The provisions of the JJ Act 2015 regarding protection of juveniles are mandatory: they create enforceable rights, not mere aspirational goals.
• No juvenile shall be placed in a jail or police lockup at any stage (S.10(1) JJ Act 2015):
• Not during apprehension
• Not during detention pending inquiry
• Not during institutional care

Ratio Decidendi

The JJ Act 2015 creates a comprehensive protective framework for children in conflict with law. Its provisions are not discretionary: they are legally binding obligations on the State. Housing juveniles with adult offenders violates their fundamental rights and the spirit of the Act.