Issue with Criminalising all Adolescent Relationships
Background: The Case
- A 14-year-old girl from rural West Bengal eloped with a 25-year-old man, later married him, and had a child at 17.
- Despite her continued support for the man, he was arrested and convicted under Section 6 of the POCSO Act (aggravated penetrative sexual assault), receiving 20 years’ imprisonment.
- The case reached the Supreme Court in Re: Right to Privacy of Adolescents (2025).
Court’s Journey
- Calcutta High Court (2022): Reversed the conviction considering:
- The couple’s socio-economic background.
- Her continued relationship and hardship.
- However, it made regressive remarks about female sexuality.
- Supreme Court (2023–25):
- Took suo motu cognisance amid media backlash.
- Restored conviction, rejecting “non-exploitative” adolescent relationships.
- Later, after emotional input from the woman (now an adult), chose not to sentence the man under Article 142, noting the harm sentencing would cause to the woman.
- Called it an “extraordinary case”, not to be treated as precedent.
Key Legal and Social Issues
1. Blanket Criminalisation under POCSO
- Age of consent is 18 (raised from 16 in 2012).
- The law assumes all sexual acts under 18 are exploitative, leaving no room for adolescent agency.
- Adolescent relationships between peers or with small age gaps are common.
- Enfold study: 24.3% of romantic POCSO cases; 82% of victims refused to testify against accused.
2. Consent and Flawed Agency
- In contexts of poverty, lack of opportunity, and child marriage norms, adolescent decisions may reflect limited agency, not informed consent.
- Yet, criminalising such choices leads to greater harm, especially for girls.
3. Systemic Failures
- The girl suffered family abandonment, social stigma, legal trauma, and lack of state support.
- Institutionalisation under Juvenile Justice Act often leads to further humiliation and rights violations.
- The Supreme Court called this case a “complete failure of society and the legal system.”
4. Judicial Dissonance
- Courts acknowledge the need for nuance, but judgments remain inconsistent.
- Bombay HC (2025) refused to quash a consensual adolescent case, awaiting law reform.
- There is reluctance to set systemic reform in motion via jurisprudence alone.
What Should Be Done?
Legal Reform Proposals:
- Recognise consensual, non-exploitative relationships between older adolescents (16+) as a distinct category, like many other countries and UNCRC General Comment 20.
- Define invalid consent in terms of coercion, authority imbalance, or lack of informed choice, not merely age.
Policy Recommendations:
- Comprehensive sexuality education
- Life-skills training and counselling
- Emergency support and grievance redressal mechanisms
- Better data on adolescent relationships and judicial outcomes
Related Posts
