Artificial Intelligence and Juvenile Justice in India: A Socio-Legal Analysis of Law as A Protective Instrument For Children in Conflict with Law

Abstract

Artificial intelligence has emerged as a transformative force in governance, law enforcement, judicial administration, forensic investigation and social welfare. Its increasing capacity to analyse large datasets, recognise patterns, predict behaviour, process digital evidence and automate administrative decision-making offers significant possibilities for improving the functioning of criminal justice institutions. The use of artificial intelligence in matters involving children in conflict with law, however, raises distinctive socio-legal concerns. Juvenile justice is fundamentally different from the ordinary criminal justice system because it is based upon protection, rehabilitation, reintegration, developmental vulnerability, reduced culpability and the belief that childhood misconduct should not permanently determine the future of a young person. The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 adopts a child-friendly framework founded upon the principles of presumption of innocence, dignity and worth, participation, best interest, family responsibility, equality and non-discrimination, privacy and confidentiality, institutionalisation as a measure of last resort, diversion, fresh start and natural justice. These principles provide an important normative framework against which the use of AI in juvenile justice must be assessed.

This article undertakes a socio-legal examination of the opportunities and risks associated with AI in cases involving children in conflict with law in India. It analyses the potential use of AI in policing, digital evidence, facial recognition, case management, preliminary assessment, bail-related decisions, rehabilitation, probation and post-release monitoring. Particular attention is given to Section 15 of the Juvenile Justice Act concerning preliminary assessment of children aged sixteen to eighteen alleged to have committed heinous offences. The Supreme Court's decision in Barun Chandra Thakur v. Master Bholu emphasised the complexity of assessing mental and physical capacity, understanding of consequences and circumstances surrounding an alleged offence, reinforcing the need for specialised and individualised assessment. The article argues that algorithmic risk scores cannot lawfully substitute for the independent judgment of the Juvenile Justice Board or qualified psychological and psycho-social experts.

The article further considers children's privacy, algorithmic discrimination, predictive policing, biometric surveillance and the statutory principle of fresh start. The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 provides special protections for children's personal data, including restrictions on detrimental processing and behavioural monitoring, although the substantive provisions of Sections 3-17, including Section 9, are scheduled to come into force eighteen months after the 13 November 2025 commencement notification and therefore are not yet operational as of August 2026. International developments, including the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, UNICEF's child-centred AI guidance and the European Union Artificial Intelligence Act, demonstrate an increasing global consensus that predictive and biometric technologies affecting children require heightened safeguards. The article concludes that law must operate as a protective instrument ensuring that AI assists rather than replaces human judgment, that children are not reduced to algorithmic risk profiles, and that rehabilitation and the possibility of a fresh start remain at the centre of Indian juvenile justice.