By Rajiv Shah
Researchers from the Indian Institute of Management-Ahmedabad (IIM-A) have attributed the failure to address inhalant misuse among teenagers to "existing domestic policies." While the Juvenile Justice (JJ) Act 2015 penalizes the sale or provision of narcotics, psychotropic drugs, alcohol, and tobacco to minors (under 18), it notably omits inhalant misuse. Even the Gujarat Juvenile Justice Rules 2019, formulated for the Act's enforcement, also fail to "recognize the issue," the researchers highlight.
In their recently published paper, "Using participatory action research to examine child protection services: Case of inhalant misuse in India", Ajazuddin Shaikh and Ankur Sarin reveal that their inquiry into policies protecting Children in Street Situations (CISS) uncovered "bureaucratic and institutional neglect." Designated institutions—the Child Welfare Committee (CWC), shelters, hospitals, and police—"played 'pass the parcel' with the children, deflecting their responsibilities on bureaucratic accounts."
The researchers, who reached this conclusion after a case study of five children from Ahmedabad, quoted a senior police officer as evidence of "lack of motivation to act." The officer stated, “We can rescue all substance-using children and adolescents (CISS) from the entire city in just 2–3 days; it is not a big deal, but what after that? They will not be treated and rehabilitated as there is no such exclusive facility available in the city, and they will just be handed over to their caregivers or known persons and will eventually return to the streets.”
Based on interactions with these children and semi-structured interviews with 15 relevant stakeholders—including members of government bodies like the Child Welfare Committee and Special Juvenile Police Unit, Municipal Councilors, and NGO workers—the study indicates that the primary response from state actors "is to hand over the children to guardians, treating the child as a liability."
The researchers stated they met the District Magistrate, accompanied by NGO activists, to inform him about such children and suggest an exclusive residential treatment facility. They had identified five children from various city "hot spots"—a railway station, a police station (in a busy market), a park, and highway sidewalks.
However, they regret, "The DM acknowledged the legitimacy of our request but questioned whether we had any data on the number of CISS using inhalants or other substances in the district. The DM was skeptical about the prevalence of such cases."
The researchers present five case studies to support their arguments:
Case Studies: Systemic Failures
Case 1: Bureaucratic ‘Pass-the-Parcel’: A 15-year-old trafficked boy, addicted to inhalants and abandoned by exploiters, was shunted between agencies due to bureaucratic inflexibility. Denied timely shelter and treatment due to procedural technicalities and poor coordination, he suffered medical neglect and emotional isolation. Admitted to a government home, he soon went missing, expressing deep distress and alienation.
Case 2: The Dejected Sister, the Wise Child?: An eight-year-old street child, familiar with institutional neglect, refused to go to a shelter, knowing treatment wouldn't follow. His married sister, initially hopeful, withdrew consent after learning no de-addiction help would be provided. The system pressured her with a liability note before allowing them to leave.
Case 3: The Tied Hands of the Law: Two young boys were found using inhalants. Despite an NGO’s plea, police refused to register a case under JJ Act Section 77, citing legal loopholes. The children were sent to a shelter but quickly returned to their families without treatment or follow-up, exposing gaps in legal enforcement and rehabilitation.
Case 4: Anxious Shelter: A railway-side shelter received five children, four visibly intoxicated, including one from Case 2. Staff hesitated to keep them due to fear and lack of training. The CWC directed immediate repatriation to caregivers without medical intervention, prioritizing exit over care.
Case 5: The Never-Ending Cycle: A child from Case 3 was found back on the streets, living with a highly vulnerable family addicted to substances. Despite repeated appeals by a social work intern, systemic inaction persisted due to staffing shortages and fragmented coordination between CWC and Childline. The child, like many others, was left to spiral back into addiction and street life.
The researchers assert, "All five cases demonstrate the absence of a physical space where substance-using CISS could be referred to and get specific treatment and rehabilitation support prescribed in the policy. They testify to the need for more state capacity in terms of setting up basic infrastructure and human resources."
They lament, "In places where the institutional architecture seems to be in place, we found it handicapped by the absence of essential personnel. The chairperson position of the State Commission for Protection of Child Rights (SCPCR, in Gujarat) had been vacant for many months and remained unfilled."
The researchers comment, "The lack of necessary supporting structures and inefficient systems’ response leads CISS to turn away from institutions built for their protection, either because of distrust or the absence of hope. This makes it easier for institutions to claim no such children exist and erase the problem."
Two years prior, the researchers conducted another study titled "Inhalant abuse among street-involved children and adolescents in India: Case for epistemic recognition and reorientation". In this study, Ajazuddin Shaikh and Ankur Sarin surveyed 158 street-involved children and adolescents (110 boys and 48 girls, aged 5 to 17) in Ahmedabad through group settings and follow-up interviews.
Arguing for the study's importance, the researchers note, "It is estimated that there are 100 million street children in the world, with India estimated to house one of every 10 street children." They underscore, "Children end up in the streets in urban India due to several complex and systemic issues, such as extreme poverty, rapid urbanization, forced migration, natural disasters, slum displacement, and trafficking."
Of the 158 children, 62.02% were working children who returned home nightly, 29.75% maintained family ties but lived independently, and 8.23% were abandoned. Demographically, 13.92% were Dalits, 1.90% were Adivasis, 38.61% were from Other Backward Classes, 28.48% belonged to Denotified Tribes, and 43.67% were Muslims.
Based on observations during 15 langars (community meals) and child-centric activities over four months in 2022 during the pandemic, the researchers found that 44.94% were non-users; 13.92% were substance users (other than inhalants); and 41.14% were inhalant abusers, such as tobacco, liquor, ganja, bhang, or other drugs (but not inhalants).
While nearly a third of the children had never attended school, and most others were dropouts, the researchers observed, "A few of the children who reported trying to go had apparently been sent back by the school pointing at their dirty and torn clothes." They added, "A few of the children who reported going to schools shared that some street-involved children and adolescents had been 'rescued' (they call it raid) by the labor department, and after that, they also stopped fearing their rescue (they call it arrest)."
According to the researchers, "Inhalant-abusing children and adolescents were found to be in extremely vulnerable health conditions." Many reported problems like body pain, nausea, chest burns, and lack of appetite. Several conditions, like "skin diseases visible as blisters and and marks," were visibly apparent, with some "suffering from severe wounds or infections," aggravated "because of neglect."
Discrimination and Survival Mechanisms
Furthermore, "The children and their parents faced direct discrimination even in using the commercial public toilets available to them." They were forced to pay significantly higher rates (Rs. 3 for urinal, Rs. 5 for toilet, Rs. 10 for bathroom, and Rs. 25–30 for washing clothes) than prescribed, which severely limited their facility usage.
Exploitative "Business Model"
Noting four eateries that seemed to offer food to street dwellers, poor migrants, and beggars, typically funded by charitable or religious motivations, the researchers observed a large number of children and adolescents congregating outside for meals.
The researchers stated these spots also served as a "business model": poor children sitting outside the restaurant for food helped attract more donations (and thus revenues) for the owners—a "win–win" situation. During inclement weather or emergencies, owners and staff provided shelter to the children and protected them from harassment by local vendors, goons, police, or anyone attempting physical or sexual abuse.
However, the researchers assert, "On probing further, the children revealed that they were forced to sit there and were threatened and abused if they refused to do so." On closer observation, an individual was found selling inhalants to the children. He was distributing a "shot" (rubber solution in a small tube) for Rs. 10 to all those who sat outside the restaurants, carrying a Doocha (a local term, likely referring to an inhalant container or related paraphernalia).
Pointing out that inhalant-abusing children would spend the Rs. 80 they earned on the inhalant, the researchers note, "According to the children, one 'shot' worked for 1–2h, and they were compelled to sit the entire day from 11 am to 11 pm; hence they needed 6–7 shots while sitting there. Thus, the money distributed among inhalant-abusing children came back into the pockets of the restaurant owners."
Comments