In 2025, a web series called Adolescence sparked widespread debate for its portrayal of a 13-year-old boy accused of murdering a classmate. The series ends when the boy decides to plead guilty, leaving unanswered what follows: What sentence would a child like him receive? Would incarceration be the end of the story or the beginning of a longer, supervised journey towards reform?
In the United Kingdom, children convicted of serious offences are sentenced to be detained at ‘His Majesty’s pleasure’, an indeterminate term where release depends on risk assessment and is followed by strict licence conditions and long-term probation supervision. Probation officers assess risk, support rehabilitation, and monitor reintegration, often for years. In this sense, probation operates as the justice system’s quiet but enduring presence, shaping outcomes long after the courtroom lights dim.
India, too, has long recognised probation as a rehabilitative alternative to incarceration. For nearly seven decades, the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 has enabled courts to release first-time offenders in non-heinous cases—that is, offences not punishable with death or life imprisonment—under supervision. This is done after assessing their conduct, circumstances, and the nature of the offence. For juveniles, probation aims to prevent reoffending by prioritising reform over punishment.
India’s probation system for Juveniles
Currently, there are 31,365 children against whom cases have been registered, 81,620 children apprehended, and 9,907 children housed in Child Care Institutions. From the moment the police apprehend or register a case against a juvenile, a probation officer is supposed to be informed immediately and remain involved with the child throughout the judicial process, including aftercare and rehabilitation. In each case, a probation officer prepares a Social Investigation Report (SIR), examining the child’s socio-economic background and family environment to ascertain conditions that may have influenced the child’s developing cognitive behaviour to assist the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) in making informed and child-centric decisions.
While probation services in India historically developed under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 introduced legal-cum-probation officers (LCPOs) under section 2(48) as a specialised force within the juvenile justice system. In practice, both probation officers and LCPOs perform probation-related functions for juveniles. Probation officers deal with cases of both adults and juveniles, while LCPOs are designated to deal with just the cases of juveniles.
The role and functioning of LCPOs is further elaborated under the Integrated Child Protection Scheme (now Mission Vatsalya). Their role includes collecting district-level data on juvenile delinquency, regularly attending JJB proceedings, assisting in inquiries and hearings, preparing and submitting SIRs, maintaining case files, escorting children to the care of institutions or fit persons, conducting follow-ups after release, establishing linkages with nonprofits, providing legal aid support, and supporting Child Welfare Committees and JJBs.
197 probation officers across 236 districts
A study by the India Justice Report reveals an alarming mismatch between these responsibilities and existing capacity. In 2022–2023, despite 707 JJBs across 765 districts and roughly 40,000 children apprehended annually, only 197 LCPOs were officially reported to be present across 236 districts. Merely four states, Himachal Pradesh, Mizoram, Odisha, and Sikkim, reported full district-level coverage while Goa reported none, and NCT of Delhi disclosed that eight of its 11 districts operate without a single LCPO, leaving some LCPOs to manage over 800 cases each. However, this data does not include the number of probation officers (under the Probation of Offenders Act) working in the state.
Average workload stands at 175 cases per LCPO
In ten states and union territories (Assam, Delhi, Himachal Pradesh, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Odisha, Sikkim, Tripura, and Telangana) that submitted complete data, the average workload stands at 175 cases per LCPO annually, with extreme variations.
Currently, there are no training facilities to equip officers with specialised skills such as an understanding of child psychology.
Further analysis of district-wise data indicates that Odisha recorded workloads above 500 cases per LCPO in many of its districts. Its Sundargarh district reported an alarming 1,479 cases for one officer in a year. These numbers reflect only caseloads, not the wide range of additional duties LCPOs perform. This level of caseload places considerable professional and emotional strain on LCPOs. It often limits their ability to meaningfully engage with children and delays the implementation of bail orders, weakens individual care plans and aftercare follow-ups, compromises SIR quality, and ultimately prolongs children’s stay in institutions.
Despite the creation of LCPOs as a specialised role, concerns remain regarding the composition and standardised training of probation services in India. Though probation officers and LCPOs are required to have legal backgrounds, a significant portion of their work requires interaction with children. Currently, there are no training facilities to equip these officers with specialised skills such as an understanding of child psychology, trauma-informed engagement, and child-sensitive practices.
Oversight failures and data gaps
Structural weaknesses compound the crisis. While LCPOs are officially appointed under and report to the District Child Protection Unit, their core responsibilities such as preparing SIRs and assisting children in conflict with the law require them to work closely with JJBs. Because of this dual working relationship, it is often unclear who is responsible for monitoring their work, assessing their performance, or holding them accountable. As a result, supervision becomes fragmented and institutional responsibility remains blurred. Opaque record-keeping practices and data inconsistencies across states reflect low administrative priority. Meanwhile, LCPOs receive a monthly honorarium of INR 27,804, offered on a contractual basis with little promise of stability, which is disproportionate to the depth of expertise and intensity of the work performed.
Resourcing the backbone of juvenile justice
The importance of probation cannot be overstated, especially for children. It is the frontline mechanism designed to ensure that a child’s first contact with the justice system becomes the beginning of healing and reintegration, not a gateway to lifelong stigmatisation and relapse into criminal activities. Yet, without adequate staffing, clear policy focus, dedicated training and structural reforms, the system falls short of this rehabilitative promise.
The following steps need to be taken to address the gaps:
- There is a need to appoint more LCPOs and fill existing vacancies, ensuring at least one LCPO in every district.
- Standardised and specialised training mechanisms must be established to equip LCPOs with the skills required to work with children and to respond to their needs.
- A monitoring authority for LCPOs must be clearly defined as they are appointed by and report to District Child Protection Units but work directly with JJBs.
- It is necessary to issue a clear framework for the responsibilities of LCPOs to prevent overload and ensure that their efforts remain focused on rehabilitation and child-centered justice.
Ultimately, strengthening probation is not a peripheral reform but a foundational one, as the promise of a rehabilitative juvenile justice system rests on the capacity of those tasked with guiding children back into society.
—
Know more
- Read the India Justice Report on Juvenile Justice to understand the data regarding functioning of LCPOs in India.
- Read the National Consultation on Probation in India to understand the ground level functioning of probation.
- Learn about what India’s aftercare system needs to help young people transition out of institutional care.
