‘Need Romeo–Juliet Clause in POCSO’ — Supreme Court
Top court urges Centre to protect consensual teenage relationships from criminal prosecution
- Supreme Court suggests legal safeguard for close-in-age teen couples
- Observations made while hearing POCSO-related bail case
- Court notes misuse of POCSO in consensual adolescent relationships
- Parents often file cases opposing such relationships
GG News Bureau
New Delhi, 12th Jan: The Supreme Court has called upon the Union government to consider introducing a “Romeo–Juliet clause” in the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act to prevent the criminalisation of genuine consensual relationships between adolescents.
A Bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and N.K. Singh made the observation while setting aside certain directions issued by the Allahabad High Court in connection with a bail plea under the POCSO Act.
The court noted that while POCSO was enacted to protect children from sexual exploitation, it is increasingly being applied in cases involving consensual teenage relationships, often leading to unintended criminal prosecution. It pointed out that families opposing such relationships frequently initiate criminal complaints, resulting in the boy being charged with statutory rape even where the girl had given consent.
The concept of the Romeo–Juliet clause, adopted in several countries including the United States, allows limited age-gap exemptions — usually between two to five years — for adolescents engaged in consensual relationships. Under such provisions, teenagers close in age are not prosecuted under statutory rape laws.
Prior to the enactment of POCSO in 2012, India’s legal age of consent stood at 16 years. However, the law raised the age of consent to 18, making any sexual activity involving minors a criminal offence, irrespective of consent.
Data from NGO Enfold India reveals that nearly a quarter of POCSO cases in states such as Assam, Maharashtra and West Bengal involve consensual adolescent relationships, with over 80 per cent of such complaints filed by parents opposing the relationship.
The apex court’s suggestion has brought renewed attention to the need for legal reforms that balance child protection with safeguarding adolescents from unintended criminal consequences.
