Core Issue

Blanket criminalization of consensual adolescent relationships under POCSO Act (Section 4) fails to distinguish between exploitative abuse and peer/romantic relationships, leading to injustice, trauma, and systemic misuse.

Key Concepts & Definitions

Term	Definition	Relevance
POCSO Act (2012)	Special law to protect children (<18 years) from sexual assault, harassment, pornography.	Mandatory reporting, strict punishments (20 yrs min. for penetrative assault).
Age of Consent	Raised from 16 to 18 years in 2012 via POCSO Amendment.	All sexual activity <18 is statutory rape, regardless of consent.
Article 142	Supreme Court’s power to pass any order for "complete justice."	Used in Re: Right to Privacy of Adolescents (2025) to avoid sentencing.
Agency vs. Consent	Agency: Capacity to act independently. Consent: Legal agreement (invalid <18).	POCSO ignores adolescent agency in consensual relationships.

Landmark Case: Re: Right to Privacy of Adolescents (2025)

Case Timeline

Stage	Key Events
Incident	14-year-old girl & 25-year-old partner (rural WB) eloped, married, had a child.
Trial Court	Man convicted under POCSO (20-year sentence).
Calcutta HC (2022)	Acquitted accused but used regressive language (girls' sexuality = "social chaos").
SC (2025)	Restored conviction but imposed no sentence using Article 142.

SC’s Rationale

• Trauma from System: Victim’s trauma stemmed from institutional response (police, courts), not the relationship.
• Committee Findings: Expert panel confirmed the woman (now adult) wished to live with her partner.
• Justice vs. Law: Punishing the man would harm the woman and child – defeating POCSO’s protective intent.

Critical Problems with POCSO’s Approach

1. Criminalizing Normative Behavior:

   • 24% POCSO cases in Assam, Maharashtra, WB involve consensual relationships (NCRB 2023).
   • Victims often refuse to testify, leading to case collapses.

2. Ignoring Adolescent Agency:

   • Law treats all <18 as incapable of consent, dismissing their autonomy in romantic relationships.

3. Systemic Harm:

   • Institutional Trauma: Forced separation, institutionalization, social stigma.
   • Misuse: Families file cases to control girls’ choices (inter-caste/religion relationships).

4. Structural Inequities:

   • Poverty, lack of education, and child marriage norms limit "meaningful consent" but criminalization doesn’t address root causes.

Reforms Proposed

• Age of Consent: Revert to 16 years with judicial discretion for 16-18 age group (Parliamentary Standing Committee 2023).
• Romeo-Julie Exception: Special provisions for consensual relationships in close-age brackets (e.g., 5-year age gap).
• Focus on Welfare: Social support over punitive action (SC’s committee approach).

Current Affairs & Updates (2023-2025)

• 2023: Parliamentary Panel recommended re-examining age of consent.
• 2024: Govt. proposed "social context" review in POCSO cases (Justice Verma Committee Follow-up).
• 2025: SC judgment (Re: Right to Privacy of Adolescents) set precedent for judicial discretion.