Introduction of “Age Memo” in addition to Arrest Memo in cases where arrestees appears young
-- Parminder Singh, Advocate --

Introduction of “Age Memo” in addition to Arrest Memo in cases where arrestees appears young

‘Court on its Own Motion vs. Department of Women & Child Development, WP(C) 8889/2011, Detailed Orders on 21.3.2012 & 11.5.2012 (Delhi High Court)

Present was Letter Petition raising serious issue touching upon the rights of the Juvenile in Conflict with Law. Issue was subjecting the Juveniles In Conflict With Law to Adult Criminal Justice System by putting them under regular criminal trial and subjecting them to incarceration in violation to the legal and constitutional rights of said Juveniles; all that in view of blatant and gross negligence of authorities, both the Police and the Magistracy, in following the Legal Mandate as to procedure and substance. Vide RTI Applications it was known that from Central Jail No.7 of the Tihar Jail during the period October, 2010 to August, 2011, 114 persons were shifted from Tihar Jail to Observation Homes after they were found to be juveniles. Petitioners raised plea that without proper care being taken by the Police Authorities at the time of arrest to find out whether the concerned person was a juvenile or adult, they were lodged in the jails. It was further mentioned that generally from appearance of the persons arrested, it could be made out that he was a child but in many cases in spite of the family of the persons arrested producing the birth certificate etc. to show that the person arrested was a child, still those evidences were ignored by the police and only when enquiry was conducted determining the age and it was ultimately found that the accused person was a child, was he shifted to Observation Home. In the process, such children were subjected to the hardship of Adult Criminal Justice System in the first instance which would have been easily avoided if proper care was taken at the time of arrest of such persons.

In the present matter notices were issued to the stake holders, Govt., Police, Jail etc.

The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) was assigned with the task of conducting an enquiry in the matter of the issue. NCPCR, along with the DSLSA, conducted the enquiry and found serious irregularities and illegalities in treating adolescent undertrials/ prisonsers.

The High Court, thereafter, intended to lay down comprehensive guidelines and policy and had expressed that it would issue directions to the various authorities as to how to deal with such cases. Accordingly, directions of interim nature were issued by the High Court, vide its order dated 21.3.2012, to be followed by the stakeholders i.e. the Jail, the JJBs, the Police, the Magistracy. Said directions had yielded remarkable results as many undertrials and convicts lodged in jail had turned out to be juveniles at the time of commission of the alleged crime and, therefore, they have been released and/or now dealt with in accordance with the JJ Act.

Thereafter, ‘A Joint Report to Eliminate Incarceration of Children in Jail’ was prepared by the parties to the petition, especially the Commission and DSLSA, and filed before the High Court.

The High Court, considering this Report, issued detailed directions to the following authorities/bodies, in order to curb out the menace:

A.      Commissioner of Police

B.      Deputy Commissioners of Police, In-charge of Districts concerned

C.      Nodal Head/In-charge of Special Juvenile Police Unit

D.      Officer-in-charge of the Police Station

E.       Investigating Officer or any other police officer acting under the instruction of Investigating Officer

F.       Juvenile Welfare Officers

G.      Tihar & Rohini Jails

H.      Juvenile Justice Boards

I.        National Commission for Protection of Child Rights

J.       Legal Aid Lawyers & Delhi Legal Services Authority

K.      Concerned Courts

L.       Government Hospitals and Medical Boards

M.     GUIDELINES for Legal Services in Juvenile Justice Institutions

The Commission was directed to constitute a Jail Visiting Panel with the objective of finding out if there are any persons lodged in such jails who should have been the beneficiaries of the JJ Act.

Thereafter, a huge exercise was done and month wise Jail Visits were conducted and set forms and procedure and reports were started being sent to the DLSA for necessary action and follow up. The Commission on 4.10.2012 constituted a Permanent Team of People to visit Jails in Delhi.

With regard to the continuing monthly jail visits, DSLSA had supplied its detailed report covering Jail Visits till December 2013, to the Commission. An analysis of the said report showed the following results:

That, an analysis of the status of children in jail based on the status report of outcome of age enquiries provided by DSLSA, is as under:


·         Inmates declared to be Juvenile after age enquiry by concerned Courts/JJBs.           198

·         Inmates declared to be Adult after age enquiry by concerned  Courts/JJBs.   873

·         Inmates released in regular course from Jail without age enquiry/determination.      355

·         Inmates whose age enquiry is ongoing and report is awaited.                                      1247

                                                                                                                                                            TOTAL : 2673

It is noteworthy that in the present case several other connected issues were dealt with and directions were issued by the High Court, most prominent and important being the direction towards Age Memo to be filled by the Police at the time of arrest of a person who appears to be young; now invariably Age Memo is attached by the Police with the arrest memo.

15 Jun 2022


-RAJKUMAR UMAKANTA SINGH, Public Prosecutor cum Govt. Advocate (HC), Manipur

Analysis of the Judicial Decisions on Clause (3) of Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950

-TAYENJAM MOMO SINGH, Advocate, High Court of Manipur & Advocate-on-Record, Supreme Court of India

Powerless Watchdogs: A Study on Diminished Powers of Indian Media Regulatory Bodies

-Shivam Vashisht (Student 2nd Year, BBA LLB, Manipal University Jaipur)

White Collar Crimes in India (A Study)

-Lovekesh Jain, Avocate

CRIMINALISATION OF POLITICS – Observations by Supreme Court

-R.K. Sahni, Advocate, Delhi High Court


-Jagruti Kate, Law Student, GLC, Mumbai

Rights under India Law for Protection of Children

-Shiv Shankar Banerjee, Advocate, Supreme Court of India


-Rajiv Raheja, Advocate, Supreme Court of India




-Shiv Shankar Banerjee, Advocate Supreme Court of India

The Extent of Criminalisation in Politics

-Asutosh Lohia, Advocate, Delhi High Court

Right of Voter to know about Candidate: A Note

-Sanjoy Yambem, Advocate, High Court of Manipur

Anti Defection Law: A Note

-Asutosh Lohia, Advocate, Delhi High Court

Legal Framework on Indian Heritage

-Shiv Shankar Banerjee, Advocate, Calcutta High Court

Human Rights and Education

-Ajay Veer Singh, Advocate, Supreme Court of India

The Art of Pleading (An Insight)

-Lovkesh Jain, Advocate

A Glimpse of the POCSO Act, 2012

-SAMARJIT HAWAIBAM, Addl. Public Prosecutor, (High Court), Manipur

Banks and NBFC — Comparison & Procedure

-Vipul Raheja, Advocate, Delhi High Court


-Mohd. Latif Malik, Advocate, J&K High Court

Insurable Interest: The Key Element Of Marine Insurance

-Atul Nigam, Advocate, Delhi High Court