The Juvenile Justice Act was introduced to protect the children who could possibly be in conflict with the law. But to jail them for very human and humane acts is an affront to civilisation. (Representational Image: DC)

The proof of the pudding is in its eating. When it comes to the efficacy of laws, whether they are the Raj-era Indian Penal Code, or the Bharatiya Nyaya Samhita, or the Juvenile Justice Act, for that matter, it all depends on the men and women who implement them and whether they are being invoked for the purpose that they are meant to serve, as envisaged by the legislature.

Hence, the reports from Uttarakhand saying that the high court there is surprised by the information presented before it through a public interest litigation — that 20 male minors have been jailed for months for the offence of, wait for it, dating — should not shock the common man. More interestingly, the prayer in the PIL is not just against the incarceration of the boys, but also against the “discrimination” they faced in the process — for the girls who are in fact the co-accused have been let off.

Uttarakhand is a part of India and one would expect that the laws that govern human relations to be the same there. Well, not exactly. For instance, the state has gone ahead and passed a uniform civil code as mandated by the Constitution when the Union government led by the BJP, the party which rules the state, is still not confident enough to take the step on the national level — the party is still checking its possible impact on the diversity that works as the cornerstone of the idea called India. The state, meanwhile, has also put in a provision under the UCC meant for live-in partners obliging them to declare their status to police and that nearly makes a relationship between two adults a criminal affair.

The Juvenile Justice Act was introduced to protect the children who could possibly be in conflict with the law. But to jail them for very human and humane acts is an affront to civilisation. The high court has issued notices to the Union and state governments on this topic. One can only hope that the judiciary will force open the executive’s dim and ancient eyes.