Unlawful Juvenile Detention & Legal Intervention

Brief:

Wrongfully imprisoned at 14 due to falsified records, Dharam faced a life sentence for crimes he didn’t commit. The LAW Foundation’s intervention exposed police negligence and caste bias, securing his release and restoring his future. Read more to uncover how legal advocacy saved a young life from systemic injustice.

Background:

In 2016, during his first prison visit, Mr. Praveen Kumar noticed Dharam Raj Kumar, a 14-year-old boy wearing a school uniform, loitering in the prison yard. Dharam, from an extremely backward class, lived with his mother, who sold vegetables at Patna City Railway Station. Despite financial hardships, he assisted her daily while dreaming of a better future. On May 29, 2016, Dharam was arrested for dacoity and drug consumption and later accused in another unrelated dacoity case. The police falsely recorded his age as 20 years, charging him with serious offenses carrying a life sentence. Shockingly, all accused in the case belonged to the OBC Mahato caste, suggesting caste-based targeting.

Intervention:

Mr. Praveen, recognizing Dharam’s young appearance, investigated his age. A home visit revealed his actual age to be 13.5 years, but his family lacked documents to prove it. However, Mr. Praveen traced his school records at Middle School Mehandiganj, where the principal issued a transfer certificate confirming his real age. The court verified the school records, declared him a juvenile in September 2016, and transferred his case to the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB), Gaighat. Dharam was later granted bail after the principal testified in court.

Due to his imprisonment, Dharam's school admission was canceled, disrupting his education. The LAW Foundation helped re-enroll him, and he is now pursuing his studies while living a normal life with his family.

Insights:

This case exposes critical failures in the justice system:

1. Police negligence: Dharam's juvenile status was ignored, with his age falsified as 20 years.
2. Judicial oversight: Despite his visible young appearance, the Magistrate failed to question his age.
3. Systemic caste bias: All accused belonged to the same caste, indicating discriminatory practices.
4. Grave consequences: Without school records, Dharam could have spent life in prison for a crime he never committed.