From Collision to Compassion: A Restorative Path for India’s Young DUI Offenders

From Collision to
Compassion: A Restorative Path for India’s Young DUI Offenders

~ By Yash Seth

Abstract
This article examines the alarming rise in juvenile Driving Under Influence (DUI) cases in India. While India’s Juvenile Justice Act (2015) prioritizes rehabilitation, it lacks structured mechanisms to address this growing crisis effectively. The research explores how Restorative Justice (RJ) models could complement India’s juvenile justice framework. Unlike traditional punitive approaches, RJ focuses on repairing harm, promoting accountability, and reducing recidivism through victim-offender dialogue and community involvement. This article explores practical strategies and community partnerships to transform India’s approach towards juvenile DUI cases.

Keywords: Driving under influence, drunken driving, restorative justice, young offenders, youth

Introduction

India in current times is facing a concerning rise in Juvenile Driving Under Influence (DUI) cases, a trend that is starkly contrasting with the decreased overall youth crime. Significant increases are shown by national statistics. The National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) has reported a 27% increase countrywide and 42.4% increase in Delhi alone by early 2024 among minors. These incidents, which usually involve wealthy youths and can result in tragic fatalities, are often associated with urbanisation, increased prosperity, and easy access to alcohol and vehicles. Although reform for young offenders is rightly given priority by India’s Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, the system finds it difficult to stop this escalation.

As rightly asserted by Howard Zehr (pioneer in the subject),

“Restorative justice is not simply a way of reforming the criminal justice system; it is a way of transforming the entire legal system, our family lives, our conduct in the workplace, our practice of politics.”

Thus, the challenge calls for exploring the alternatives like Restorative Justice (RJ). When used correctly, RJ offers a distinct approach. By looking at RJ models from around the globe, in this blog, I examine how India’s Judicial system could handle juvenile DUI cases differently. By adopting some of these models, we can create a system, one where the young offender has the opportunity to take responsibility for their action and find a path to redemption.

Punishment vs. Repair: Two Different Paths for Justice

Traditional criminal justice and restorative justice approaches differ in their philosophies regarding crime and its impacts. The Traditional Criminal Justice primarily focuses on punishing the offenders for breaking the laws, maintaining the social order through retribution and aiming for deterrence. This court-centric, adversarial process helps to determine the guilt and imposes penalties. Very often on the contrary the critics have pointed out that this approach tends to overlook the victim support, eventually not effectively addressing the root causes of offending behaviour leading to a cycle of re-offending (recidivism).

On the other hand, restorative justice views crime as a harm that is done to relationships and the community, eventually shifting the focus from punishments to repairing that harm. The stakeholders that are involved are – victims, offenders and the community – in collaboration, dialogue-based processes to address the consequences and underlying causes of the crime. The core objective of this method is to heal, make accountable and reintegrate offenders to understand their impact and make amendments.

Studies that involve meta-analysis, suggests that restorative practices often result in higher victim satisfaction, an increased compliance with restitution and notably lower recidivism rates when compared to traditional punitive measures, thereby indicating its potential for more positive outcomes for everyone involved.

Constructing Bridges, Not Walls: Restorative Justice for Young Offenders

Restorative Justice (RJ) have fundamentally shifted the focus from mere punishment to repairing the harm caused by commission of the offence, thereby viewing the offenders not just in violations of the law but as breaches of end-to-end relationships within the community. Unlike the very traditional models centred on the states and offenders, RJ tends to actively include the victims, offenders and community in a collaborative process.

The Core Principles of the Restorative Form of Justice
The framework is anchored in four foundational principles:

1. Repair: Addressing material and emotional damages.

2. Inclusion: Ensuring that affected parties, especially the victims, have a voice.

3. Accountability: Majorly achieved through dialogue and moral reckoning and not through coercion.

4. Reconciliation: Aiming to restore trust and social harmony.

Thus in essence, restorative justice is not a soft option but it can be termed as a strategic, rights-based alternative that treats crime as a teachable moment, thus upholding rehabilitation and empathy over the stringent punishment programs and isolation.

This restorative method works well for young offenders, including those who commit serious offenses such as DUI. Young people tend to offend because of factors beyond their control, meaning their brains are much more susceptible to change, and RJ provides an opportunity for rehabilitation rather than entrapment within a stratum of stigma and recidivism experienced in purely retributive systems. Here, the RJ programme provides a chance of growth by focusing on repairing the harm and nurturing responsibility. This also aligns strongly with the International Standards like the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), ratified by India, which emphasizes dignity and reintegration¹. The Indian Judiciary, as demonstrated in Sheela Barse case², has backed alternatives to incarceration that assist growth, thus making RJ a constructive response that helps juveniles learn from their mistakes. The Juvenile Justice Act (2015) has favoured reform but currently lacks RJ’s structured approach.

The Numbers Don’t Lie: India’s Escalating Juvenile DUI Statistics

The current data in India draws out an alarming picture on increased DUI offences. According to the Delhi Traffic Police in 2024, there was a surge of 27% in DUI cases during the first half of the year, with a staggering increase of 42.4% among juveniles alone. In Mumbai the trend is similarly concerning. Between the month of January and June 2024, the authorities have registered approximately 3,800 cases related to drunk driving, that surpasses the 2,900 cases recorded in 2023, thus marking a significant shift in juvenile offending patterns – from minor infractions to dangerous, life-threatening behaviour. Same was the case in Nagpur where the data obtained through RTI revealed that on an average, around 49 cases were registered on an annual basis that related to driving cases committed by the young offenders.

In addition to statistical trends, several high-profile incidents have highlighted the severity of juvenile offenders in the matters of Driving Under the Influence:

• Two motorbike riders were killed instantaneously in May 2024 after a 17-year-old in Pune allegedly crashed a Porsche into them while under the influence of alcohol. The case spurred a national discussion on adolescent accountability and the suitability of legal repercussions.

• In 2023, several people were gravely injured when a 16-year-old in Hyderabad crashed a stolen car while intoxicated.

• In March 2023, there were a lot of public outcries and calls for tougher juvenile DUI enforcement after a youngster in Bengaluru caused a deadly accident while driving under the influence.

These events highlight the shortcomings of the current juvenile judicial systems as well as the growing social challenge posed by underage DUI. To successfully stop such risky behaviour among children, there is a need to have a multifaceted strategy that strikes a balance between public education, restorative justice-based rehabilitation, and law enforcement.

Lessons from Outside: Global Approach to Juveniles Restorative Justice

Restorative Justice (RJ) models worldwide have transformed Juvenile Justice, offering a rehabilitative alternative punishment that aligns with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), which was ratified by India in 1992. Globally, nations have implemented many frameworks that have tailored RJ to juvenile offenders as those who are involved in Driving Under the Influence (DUI).

A. New Zealand: The Pioneer
Under the Children, Young Persons and Their Families Act, 1989, New Zealand has set the frameworks for Family Group Conferences, where the victims, families and the offender work in tandem to develop rehabilitation plans, which subsequently resulted in 36% of the participants avoiding the reoffending within a year.

B. South Africa: Ubuntu’s Touch
South Africa’s post-apartheid Restorative Justice from Ubuntu, prioritizes more on community and compassion. The Child Justice Act of 2008 has codified victim-offender mediation and diversion programs that keep kids out of jail within ties. The Act formalizes these efforts, offering a legal backbone, getting its inspiration from the CRC.

C. United States (US): A Patchwork to Progress
States like Colorado and Vermont in the US have embraced models of Restorative Justice through community conferencing and restorative circles. These programs, which are also supported by the Juvenile Justice Laws, bring stakeholders together to craft restitution plans.

D. Brazil and England: Creative Approaches
Brazil’s Children and Adolescent Act, 1990 lets judges halt the prosecution for minor crimes and testing restorative chambers in Porto Alegre. England’s Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act, 1999 gave birth to the Youth Offenders Panels, which refers first-timers to the community panel. The Youth Offending Team (YOT) takes it even further, to ensure that victims opt for reparative projects, blending the legal oversight with the community involvement.

Moving Forward: A Call for Restorative Approaches

Implementing RJ in India faces significant hurdles that include cultural resistance within a system that is primarily traditional-focused, scepticism from the stakeholders who usually view the RJ model as too lenient for serious offences like DUI, and a lack of adequate infrastructure, funding and trained personnel. Additionally, limited public and professional awareness about RJ’s potential benefits for rehabilitation and community healing also hinders the wide acceptance of this model.

To the advantage, these obstacles can easily be tackled with practical solutions:

• Pilot Programs in urban areas – where cases of DUI by young offenders are more common – could test RJ’s effectiveness on a small scale.

• Training Programs for legal professionals, community and social workers could be crucial steps to build expertise and ensure consistent implementation.

• Partnerships with NGOs and Local Organisations can help tap into existing community networks, making RJ more accessible and cost-effective.

• Public Awareness Campaigns through media, schools and local forums can highlight RJ’s success stories, helping shift public perception and garner support.

By proactively addressing these challenges, India can unlock RJ’s potential to transform juvenile justice, thereby offering young DUI offenders a path to accountability and redemption while promoting more cohesive and safer communities.

Conclusion

The rise in DUI cases among young offenders in India needs a rethink of its justice approach. The JJA, 2015 prioritizes rehabilitation, yet it lacks structured restorative justice (RJ) mechanisms, leaving a gap in addressing recidivism effectively. In accordance with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), international examples such as South Africa’s Ubuntu-inspired mediation and New Zealand’s Family Group Conferences show how RJ can reduce reoffending rates while promoting accountability and healing.

“Restorative justice is about building peace through cooperative processes.” – John Braithwaite

By providing young DUI offenders with a route to rehabilitation and reintegration, RJ implementation through pilot programs, training, and community collaborations can complement the juvenile justice’s reformative attitude and the CRC’s call for dignity. In addition to safer streets, this legally sound change promises a judicial system that supports young people and promotes a society where compassion and accountability coexist in harmony.

Author’s Bio
Yash Seth is an LLM student at NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad (Batch of 2025).

References