Question

From which of the following dates was the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 implemented?

• A. January 16, 2015
• B. January 15, 2016
• C. February 16, 2016
• D. February 15, 2015
• A. ‘A’ can raise the plea of juvenility since he was child on the date of commission of the offence.
• B. ‘A’ cannot be allowed to raise the plea of juvenility.
• C. For raising the plea of juvenility, the age on the date of trial is considered and not the age on the date of commission of offence.
• D. All are true.
• A. The Court can decide the plea of juvenility only on the basis of the affidavit of the claimant.
• B. The Court shall get the enquiry conducted by collector of the district.
• C. The Court shall take such evidence as it considers necessary and decide the age of the claimant.
• D. Both (A) and (B) are true.
• A. The Court is bound to try the entire case and decide whether the claimant has committed the offence.
• B. The order of conviction passed by the Court after recording finding that the accused is a child, is valid.
• C. The Court shall forward the matter to Juvenile Justice Board for decision and appropriate orders.
• D. The Court shall set the accused free.
• A. Orphaned children
• B. Abused children
• C. Neglected children
• D. Children in conflict with law
• A. A child who is without a biological parent
• B. A child who is without an adoptive parent
• C. A child who is without a legal guardian
• D. All the above

Answer 1

The Correct Option is B

Step 1: Background of the Act.
The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 replaced the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 to strengthen provisions for both children in conflict with law and children in need of care and protection.
Step 2: Date of enforcement.
While the Act received Presidential assent on 31 December 2015, it came into force on 15 January 2016 as notified by the Government of India.
Step 3: Eliminating incorrect options.
- (A) January 16, 2015 and (D) February 15, 2015 are dates prior to the passing of the Act.
- (C) February 16, 2016 is after the notified enforcement date.
\[ \boxed{Answer: B} \]

Answer 2

The question asks for the exact date on which the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 came into force, giving four closely spaced dates across two years to choose from. Tracing the legislative timeline pins down the right one.

1. January 16, 2015: This date falls before the Act was even passed by Parliament, since the Bill was only passed by the Lok Sabha in May 2015, so this date cannot be the date of enforcement.
2. January 15, 2016: The Bill received the assent of the President on 31 December 2015, and the Central Government then notified 15 January 2016 as the date on which the Act would come into force, repealing the earlier Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 from that date. This matches the actual notified commencement date.
3. February 16, 2016: This date comes after the Act had already been brought into force the previous month, so it does not correspond to the commencement notification.
4. February 15, 2015: Like the first option, this predates both the passage of the Bill and the President's assent, making it impossible to be the date the Act took effect.

Since the Act received assent at the very end of December 2015 and the government's commencement notification took effect a couple of weeks later, only one of the four dates lines up with that timeline.

Hence, the correct answer is January 15, 2016.

Answer 3

Step 1: Determining juvenility under the Juvenile Justice Act.
Section 9(2) and (3) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 provides that juvenility is determined based on the age on the date of commission of the offence, not the date of trial.
Step 2: Application to the case.
Since ‘A’ was below 18 on January 1, 2022, he is legally considered a child for the purpose of claiming juvenility, even if he turned 16 (or more) before trial.
Step 3: Eliminating incorrect options.
- (B) is wrong as law permits raising plea anytime, even after disposal of the case.
- (C) is incorrect because it wrongly states that trial date age matters.
- (D) is wrong because both (B) and (C) are incorrect.
\[ \boxed{Answer: A} \]

Answer 4

This question requires working out, on the facts given, whether 'A' is entitled to raise a plea of juvenility, and each option makes a different claim about how that determination is made under the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015.

1. 'A' can raise the plea of juvenility since he was a child on the date of commission of the offence: The offence is dated January 1, 2022, and 'A' did not turn 16 until March 31, 2022, roughly three months later. Since he was under 18, and in fact under 16, on the date the offence was committed, he falls within the statutory definition of a child for that date, and Section 9(2) of the Act ties juvenility strictly to age on the date of the offence, not the date of trial. He is therefore entitled to raise the plea.
2. 'A' cannot be allowed to raise the plea of juvenility: This would only be correct if he had already been 18 or above on the date of the offence, which is not the case here, or if the law barred the plea from being raised late, which it does not, since the proviso to Section 9(2) allows the claim at any stage, even after final disposal of a case.
3. The age on the date of trial is considered, not the age on the date of commission of offence: This directly contradicts Section 9(2), which fixes the relevant date as the date of commission of the offence, precisely so that a person who ages past 18 while the case is pending does not lose the protection they were entitled to at the time of the act.
4. All are true: This cannot be correct because statements (B) and (C) are themselves incorrect, so a statement that depends on all three being true fails as soon as any one of them is wrong.

Since the relevant date for juvenility is the date of the offence, and 'A' was clearly under 18 on that date, only the first statement correctly applies the law to these facts.

Hence, the correct answer is that 'A' can raise the plea of juvenility since he was a child on the date of commission of the offence.

Answer 5

Step 1: Statutory requirement.
Section 9(2) of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 requires the Court to conduct an inquiry, take necessary evidence, and record a finding regarding the age of the person.
Step 2: Why not (A) or (B)?
- (A) is incorrect because an affidavit alone is insufficient; evidence must be taken.
- (B) is incorrect because the Act does not mandate the Collector to conduct the enquiry; the Court can do it itself or direct appropriate authority.
\[ \boxed{Answer: C} \]

Answer 6

The question asks how a court is expected to go about deciding a plea of juvenility once it is raised, offering three different procedural routes before a combination option. Matching each option against the actual procedure Section 9(2) lays down shows which is correct.

1. The Court can decide the plea only on the basis of the claimant's affidavit: An affidavit is a self-serving, untested statement, and the law requires more than that before a person's age, a fact with major consequences for how they are tried and sentenced, can be conclusively determined. An affidavit alone is not treated as sufficient.
2. The Court shall get the enquiry conducted by the Collector of the district: The statute does not hand this inquiry over to a district revenue official. The determination of age is a judicial function that the court carrying the case is itself required to perform.
3. The Court shall take such evidence as it considers necessary and decide the age of the claimant: This mirrors Section 9(2), which requires the court to make an inquiry, take such evidence as may be necessary, other than an affidavit, and record a finding on the age of the person. The determination stays with the court seized of the matter.
4. Both (A) and (B) are true: Since neither the affidavit-only route nor the Collector-led inquiry route reflects the actual statutory procedure, a combination of the two incorrect options cannot itself be correct.

The statute keeps the age-determination process squarely within the court's own hands, requiring it to gather actual evidence rather than relying on either a bare affidavit or delegating the task to a revenue authority.

Hence, the correct answer is that the Court shall take such evidence as it considers necessary and decide the age of the claimant.

Answer 7

Step 1: Legal procedure after finding of juvenility.
If a person is found to be a child on the date of the offence, Section 9(3) of the Juvenile Justice Act mandates that the Court must forward the case to the Juvenile Justice Board for disposal in accordance with the Act.
Step 2: Why not other options?
- (A) is incorrect because after such finding, regular trial jurisdiction ceases.
- (B) is invalid because conviction by regular court is barred after such finding.
- (D) is incorrect because the matter still requires adjudication by the Board; accused is not automatically acquitted.
\[ \boxed{Answer: C} \]

Answer 8

The question describes a court that has already conducted an inquiry and recorded a finding that the accused was a child on the date of the offence, and asks what the court must do next. Each option describes a different consequence of that finding, and only one matches the statutory command.

1. The Court is bound to try the entire case and decide guilt itself: Once a finding of juvenility is recorded, the ordinary criminal court's jurisdiction to try and sentence the person as an adult comes to an end for that purpose, so continuing to try the case itself would run against the very finding the court just made.
2. An order of conviction passed after such a finding is valid: A regular criminal court convicting and sentencing someone it has just found to have been a child at the time of the offence would be legally inconsistent, since the beneficial, rehabilitative framework of the Juvenile Justice Act is meant to apply instead of ordinary criminal conviction and sentencing.
3. The Court shall forward the matter to the Juvenile Justice Board for decision and appropriate orders: Section 9(3) requires exactly this, once the court records that the person was a child on the date of the offence, it must forward the case to the Board, and any sentence already passed is deemed to have no effect, so that the matter proceeds under the child-specific framework.
4. The Court shall set the accused free: A finding of juvenility changes which forum decides the matter and how it is handled, it does not amount to an acquittal or automatic release, the question of what happened still needs to be examined, just by the Board instead of the ordinary court.

The statute is explicit that once a court records a finding of juvenility, its own role in adjudicating guilt or sentence ends and the case must move to the specialised Board designed to handle children in conflict with law.

Hence, the correct answer is that the Court shall forward the matter to the Juvenile Justice Board for decision and appropriate orders.

Answer 9

Step 1: Understanding “special homes” under JJ Act, 2015.
Section 2(56) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 defines “special home” as an institution for the reception and rehabilitation of children in conflict with law.
Step 2: Differentiating from other facilities.
- Orphaned, abused, and neglected children are generally placed in “children’s homes” or “observation homes” depending on their needs, not in special homes.
- Special homes are specifically for those found guilty of offences and requiring
rehabilitation under the orders of the Juvenile Justice Board.
Step 3: Conclusion.
Thus, only option (D) matches the statutory definition. \[ \boxed{Answer: D} \]

Answer 10

The question asks which category of children the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 places in special homes, and lists three categories of vulnerable children alongside children who are in conflict with law. The Act actually maintains separate categories of institutions for these two very different groups, and matching each option to the right institutional category answers the question.

1. Orphaned children: Children who are orphaned fall under the child-in-need-of-care-and-protection category, and the Act places such children in Children's Homes or similar facilities meant for rehabilitation and reintegration, not in special homes, which are reserved for children who have gone through the justice process.
2. Abused children: Abused children are likewise treated as children in need of care and protection and are placed in Children's Homes, Open Shelters or other protective institutions designed around their welfare needs, not in special homes.
3. Neglected children: Neglected children fall in the same in-need-of-care-and-protection category as orphaned and abused children and are accommodated in the corresponding protective institutions rather than special homes.
4. Children in conflict with law: The Act defines a special home as an institution meant for the reception and rehabilitation of children found, after inquiry by the Juvenile Justice Board, to have committed an offence. This is the one category of children the Act specifically routes into special homes.

The scheme of the Act separates children needing protection from children who are alleged or found to have committed offences, and special homes are reserved exclusively for the latter group as part of their rehabilitation process.

Hence, the correct answer is children in conflict with law.

Answer 11

Step 1: Statutory definition under JJ Act, 2015.
Section 2(42) defines “orphan” as a child:
1. Who is without a biological parent, or
2. Without an adoptive parent, or
3. Without a legal guardian.
Step 2: Interpretation.
Since any of these situations qualifies a child as an orphan under the Act, all the listed options are correct.
Step 3: Conclusion.
Option (D) includes all statutory conditions. \[ \boxed{Answer: D} \]

Answer 12

The question asks which description matches the statutory definition of orphan under the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, offering three separate scenarios of missing parental or guardianship figures before an all-the-above option.

1. A child who is without a biological parent: A child whose biological parents are no longer alive or traceable, and who has no adoptive parent or legal guardian either, falls within the statutory description of an orphan, since the absence of a biological parent is one of the conditions the definition covers.
2. A child who is without an adoptive parent: The definition equally covers a child who lacks an adoptive parent, extending the same protective status to children who may have been placed for adoption but have no adoptive parent stepping in, alongside no biological parent or guardian either.
3. A child who is without a legal guardian: The definition also extends to a child without a legal guardian, recognising that the absence of a legal guardian, combined with the absence of biological or adoptive parents, leaves a child without anyone legally responsible for their care.
4. All the above: The statutory definition of orphan is written to cover a child lacking biological or adoptive parents or a legal guardian, meaning it deliberately spans all three situations rather than picking out just one of them.

Since the definition is drafted broadly enough to capture each of these three circumstances of missing parental or guardianship support, no single scenario by itself fully represents what the Act treats as an orphan.

Hence, the correct answer is all the above.