Criminalising adolescent sex undermines POCSO Act's aim
The article argues that criminalizing consensual sex between adolescents aged 16-18 years undermines the core objective of the POCSO Act, 2012, which is to protect children. It highlights a trend where adolescents in voluntary relationships face persecution, prompting calls for review and exemptions. Senior advocate Indira Jaising's submission to the Supreme Court suggests that such consensual acts should not be deemed 'abuse' under POCSO Act and Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). While the Law Commission advised "guided judicial discretion" for sentencing, the article stresses the need for caveats to ensure the law's broad intent is met, as suggested by the Madras High Court.
Key Points
- The core objective of the POCSO Act, 2012, is to protect children, but its application to consensual adolescent relationships is being questioned.
- Senior advocate Indira Jaising advocates for an exception in POCSO and BNS for consensual sex between 16-18 year olds to prevent misuse.
- The Law Commission in 2023 suggested "guided judicial discretion" for sentencing in such cases, rather than changing the age of consent.
- The Madras High Court in Vijayalakshmi vs State Rep (2021) suggested an age difference limit of five years in consensual relationships to prevent exploitation.
- Criminalizing normal adolescent behavior is deemed counterproductive to protecting against non-consensual, exploitative sexual offenses.
Exam Facts
- The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act was enacted in 2012.
- Senior advocate Indira Jaising was appointed amicus curiae in a petition filed by advocate Nipun Saxena.
- The Law Commission's 2023 report addressed the age of consent.
- Section 2(d) of the POCSO Act defines a "child" as anyone below 18 years.
Read it. Retain it. Recall it.
Get spaced-repetition flashcards, daily quizzes and offline access — free on Android.