Criminalising Adolescence: Misuse of POCSO in Consensual Teenage Relationships
“The law meant to protect childhood must not become the sword that destroys it.”
The aim of POCSO is protection, not prosecution of young ones. We cannot safeguard children by criminalising their developmental years. The Protection Of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, is one of India’s most stringent children’s protection laws, based on the belief that minors cannot legally consent to sexual activity. However, its rigid framework has unintentionally resulted in a surge in criminal cases involving consensual romantic relationships between adolescents. Courts across India have repeatedly expressed concern over this misuse, highlighting how the Act is deployed less as a legal safeguard and more as a tool of parental control and exploitation. Adolescence is a phase of discovery, curiosity, and emotional exploration. Yet, for many Indian teenagers, innocent affection has become entangled with criminal law. When consensual relationships between minors are prosecuted under POCSO, the consequences are severe: young boys are labelled as offenders, families are torn apart and teenage girls often lose agency over their own choices. The gap between law and practical reality continues to widen, raising an urgent question i.e.
“Are we protecting teenagers, or punishing them for being teenagers?”
What was designed as a protective statute is increasingly being invoked by parents to assert control, settle personal disputes, or penalise relationships they disapprove of. This misuse not only criminalises natural adolescent behaviour but also clogs the justice system with cases far removed from the Act’s true intent.
This very article critically examines the legal, social, and psychological implications of criminalising consensual teenage relationships under POCSO.
Article 15 of the Indian Constitution grants the Fundamental right to equality to all and prohibits discrimination on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth. However, this article is subject to certain reasonable restrictions. The article also allows for special provisions to be made for women and children, socially and educationally backward classes, and economically backward classes. Article 15(3) enables the state to make special provisions for the welfare and upliftment of women and children. This clause is designed as an exception to the general rule to address the historical disadvantages and enable special positive actions to uplift these groups through law and policy-making.
The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 is an Act to protect minors from sexual assault, sexual harassment and pornography in conformity and accordance to Article 15(3) to effectively address the heinous crimes of sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children through less ambiguous and more stringent legal provisions, the Ministry of Women and Child Development championed the introduction of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. It establishes special courts for the speedy trial of matters incidental to or connected with them. This statute was a result of dire need arising out of nationwide controversies, protests and women’s and children’s rights-led movements. It defines different forms of sexual abuse, including penetrative and non-penetrative assault, as well as sexual harassment and pornography, and deems a sexual assault to be “aggravated” under certain circumstances, such as when the abused child is mentally ill or when the abuse is committed by a person in a position of trust or authority vis-à-vis the child, like a family member, police officer, teacher, or doctor.
The Act is gender-neutral, as it applies to all genders, regardless of whether the victim or perpetrator is male or female, thereby placing the interests and welfare of children as paramount. According to this Act, a child includes any person below the age of 18 years old. The main object of this Act was to protect children from sexual offences, but with growing time, things have changed, and so has society. The way society thinks, adapts and behaves is way more different now. Adolescent relationships, which were not so common at the time of enactment of this Act, are prevalent and on trend nowadays. Though this has been a result of westernisation and personal choices but the way this present generation views these relationships is way different from what their parents and older generations perceive. With growing times and more legal awareness, the POCSO Act seems to have a rather destructive effect than a protective one.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
Pre- POCSO Act
Before the POCSO Act, child sexual abuse cases were handled under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), such as sections 354, 375, and 377, as well as state-specific laws like the Goa Children’s Act, 2003.
In 19792, the Supreme Court overturned the High Court’s verdict and acquitted the policemen again. The court’s reasoning was widely criticised for focusing on the victim’s lack of physical resistance and failure to raise an alarm as indicators of consent, ignoring the coercive power dynamics of the custodial setting. This controversial decision led to nationwide protests and a powerful women’s rights movement, with legal luminaries writing an open letter to the Chief Justice of India demanding a review of the judgment and a change in the law. This public outcry was the primary catalyst for the Criminal Law Act of 19833, which brought about crucial reforms to Indian rape laws.
Gorakh Daji Ghadge V. The State of Maharashtra on 6 March 19804, the father was accused of raping his 13-year-old daughter at home. The Bombay High Court held that seminal emission was not necessary to determine the offence of rape. It also prescribed stringent punishment because the victim was the daughter of the accused. The judgement inscribes: “Crimes in which women are victims need to be severely dealt with, and in extreme cases such as this, where the accused, who is the father of the victim girl, has thought it fit to deflower his own daughter of tender years to gratify his lust, then only a deterrent sentence can meet the ends of justice.”
In Sheela Barse & Others vs Union Of India & Others on 13 August, 19865, a Social worker, Ms Sheela Bars, took up the case of children below the age of 16 illegally detained in jails. As part of the ruling, the Court declared the right to speedy trial is a fundamental right implicit under Article 21 of the Constitution.
As held in the State of Punjab Vs. Gurmit Singh and Others on 16 January, 19966, the Supreme Court was highly critical of the acquittal of persons accused of gang-raping a 16-year-old girl. The trial court had referred to the young village girl as a person of loose character who had invented the story of rape to justify spending a night out of the home. It had refused to rely on her statement. The Supreme Court observed that the appreciation of evidence by the trial court was “not only unreasonable but perverse”. It held that: “The testimony of the victim in such cases is vital and unless there are compelling reasons which necessitate looking for corroboration of her statement, the courts should find no difficulty to act on the testimony of a victim of sexual assault alone to convict an accused where her testimony inspires confidence and is found to be reliable. Seeking corroboration of her statement before relying upon the same, as a rule, in such cases amounts to adding insult to injury.”
Sakshi Vs. Union of India on 26 May 20047, The NGO Sakshi filed a writ petition in Public Interest to broaden the definition of rape in cases involving children where the child is abused by insertion of objects into the vagina or insertion of the male organ into body parts such as anus or mouth. The Supreme Court rejected the plea & dismissed the public interest litigation. But it issued valuable guidelines for the trial of rape and sexual abuse, which concern children.
A lack of specific legislation led the Supreme Court of India and the Law Commission of India to recognise the need for a specialised law to protect children from sexual offences.
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012
The POCSO Act was enacted on June 19, 2012 and came into force on November 14, 2012. The law, officially titled the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, was passed by the Indian Parliament to protect children from sexual assault, sexual harassment and pornography.
Besides a constitutional basis under Article 15, the Act was drafted in furtherance of India’s obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), which India acceded to in 1992. The Convention has 54 articles covering all aspects of a child’s life and sets out the civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights. The convention is universal, and these rights apply to and entitle every child to claim them.
The Act expands the definition of sexual abuse to include non-penetrative and visual acts, not just penetrative ones. It defines a child as any person below the age of 18 years and establishes special courts introducing child-friendly procedures to safeguard children at every stage of the legal process. POCSO puts the burden of proof on the accused rather than the victim. The onus is on the accused to prove that he/she is innocent rather than on the child to prove that the crime took place.
State of Karnataka v. Shivanna (2014)8 dealt with the presumption of guilt under the POCSO Act. The Supreme Court affirmed that the law operates a statutory presumption against the accused in certain circumstances, and it is up to the accused to prove their innocence.
Attorney General for India v. Satish (2021):In this case, the Supreme Court overturned a Bombay High Court ruling that required “skin-to-skin contact” for sexual assault. The Supreme Court clarified that the essence of the crime is the “sexual intent,” and physical contact with a sexual motive is a sexual assault under the POCSO Act. The Supreme Court of India upheld every girl’s right to bodily dignity and criminalised rape during underage marriage and held that sexual intercourse with a girl below 18 years of age is rape regardless of whether she is married or not.
POCSO IN CONSENSUAL TEENAGE RELATIONSHIPS
Adolescence is not a crime; it is a phase of learning, mistakes, and discovery. Teenage relationships are a normal part of growing up and involve emotional and physical development. They can vary widely and may be romantic or platonic. It is a significant stage in the overall development of adolescents. It involves physical, social and emotional changes and perceptions. They’re linked to the way pre-teens and teenagers explore body image, independence, privacy and identity. These relationships can be a result of various factors including peer pressure, society, and combination of hormonal and brain development, which intensifies emotions and sexual attraction, and social and emotional needs, such as a desire for companionship to build self-esteem and to fit in with peers. Cultural expectations influenced by social media also play a significant role in the pressure to date and form relationships.
But it is not always necessary that these relationships are accepted or favoured in their families. Many times strict parenting, lack of understanding due to generational gap, lack of emotional support and affection paves a path for these relationships besides other factors.
The POCSO Act imposes strict penalties upon the convicted. A brief summary of these punishments is as follows:
Sexual Harassment
Imprisonment upto 3 years and a fine.
Aggravated sexual assault
A minimum of five years imprisonment, and a fine.
Sexual assault
A minimum of three to five years imprisonment, and a fine.
Aggravated penetrative sexual assault
20 years to life imprisonment and a fine, or even death.
Penetrative sexual assault:
Minimum 10 years, up to life imprisonment, and a fine.
Storing/possessing pornographic material involving a child
For commercial purposes, a first conviction is 3 to 5 years with a fine. Subsequent convictions are 5 to 7 years with a fine.
For non-commercial purposes, up to 3 years, or a fine, or both. Now what happens is that many times these cases are motivated by property, monetary gains or personal grudges. The central issue of this article is misuse of POCSO in these relationships and not these relationships itself. Failure of these relationships can cause mental health issues like depression and anxiety, decreased academic performance due to distraction, social isolation from friends and family. Unhealthy or abusive relationships can also lead to physical and sexual health risks, emotional strain, and a loss of self-esteem. This often gives birth to feelings of revenge, vengeance and personal grudges which is the root cause of criminal intent and activities. Another main issue which gives way to these criminal activities and intent is a strict family environment, where children are not able to share their opinions and feelings with their parents. Such children often find themselves stuck in a loop. They either conceal their feelings or problems arising out of relationships from their families causing intentional or unintentional offences.
Illustration: A child A, brought up in a toxic or abusive family where whose emotions are often neglected, often finds home outside home, longing for care, affection and love in his naïveness. A is unable to differentiate between rights and wrongs even in an abusive relationship, where a child is exploited even more. As a result, the child keeps on suffering. Sometimes, this leads to criminal activities eg. where A in his innocence allows for recording of their sexual intercourse. This may be a problem later on. A may be subjected to blackmailing, forceful sexual relationships etc.
In another instance, this may even be a problem for other partner B, if due to a failed relationship, A himself out of revenge, peer pressure or any other reason tries to take advantage of B.
Hence, it becomes very crucial for families as well as educational institutes to inculcate values of morality and decency among children. It is parents and families who are responsible to maintain an open and friendly relationship with their young ones so as to ensure proper understanding, sharing and a healthy relationship and environment.
There are relationships where families themselves try to extort money from their rivals by implicating false and frivolous cases through their own children, only for monetary gains.
There have also been cases where girls after being caught up in their stereotype socities where such relationships are seen as curse to their dignity and honour, the families themselves or the girl, tries to cover these relationships by implicating false cases upon boys. For some, this Act has served to be a monetary boon, by lodging fake cases and accessing compensation. Even if they lose the case, they’re given interim compensation.
This not only disturbs the scope and purpose of the Act but also poses serious questions upon the authenticity of cases where the victim is aggrieved in real life. Consent may be invalid in law, but emotions in adolescence are very real. For this very reason, where both parties are involved in a consensual relationship, one is punished. The real danger is when a protective law becomes a weapon in parental conflicts.We cannot safeguard children by criminalising their growing years. A society that confuses adolescent curiosity with criminal intent fails both its children and its laws. Hence, the court by such laws not only punishes the innocents many times but also fails as a mechanism itself. This doesn’t mean the Act itself is an issue, but so is the society in whose hands the Act has been made in favour of.
JUDICIAL TRENDS: POCSO CASES
POCSO cases are increasing, partly due to greater awareness is a major concern, given its backlog. To address this, India has established Fast Track Special Courts (FTSCs) dedicated to handling POCSO and other serious crimes. There is still a need for more such courts and trained personnel for their investigation and disposal. Despite several cases where the court has ruled against the accused, there have been several cases where Hon’ble courts have kept in consideration the love, consent and other factors between the adolescents as a key factor in ruling. In Vijayalakshmi v. State of Tamil Nadu The Madras High Court quashed criminal proceedings under the POCSO Act against an adolescent boy for being in a relationship with a minor girl, emphasizing that punishing such relationships was not the law’s intent. The court called for legislative amendments to the POCSO Act to differentiate between consensual adolescent relationships and actual sexual offenses against children, stating that adolescents often lack mature decision-making abilities and require support, not criminalization.
In a rare judgment invoking its extraordinary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court has quashed the conviction and sentence of a man who had been found guilty under Section 366 IPC and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, after taking note of his subsequent marriage to the victim and their subsequent settled family life.
In re: Right to Privacy of Adolescents 19 2019, the Supreme Court used its powers under Article 142 to spare a POCSO convict from a 20-year jail sentence, concluding that imprisonment would cause further harm to the victim and family. The court emphasized that this, although, was not a blanket precedent.
Sabari v. Inspector of Police, wherein the Bench had discussed in detail about the cases in which persons of the age group of 16 to 18 years were involved in love affairs and how in some cases ultimately end up in a criminal case booked for an offence under the POCSO Act.
The court also highlighted incidents where teenagers and young adults fall victim to offences under the POCSO Act being slapped against them without understanding the implication of the severity of the enactment, is an issue that brings much concern to the conscience of this Court.
In one of the cases the Supreme Court set aside conviction of accused keeping in consideration the consent of both parties and marriage of accused with victim. The Court also observed that upholding the conviction would disrupt the family’s peace and cause irreparable harm to the wife and child.
SOCIO-LEGAL IMPACT ON ADOLESCENTS
The criminalisation of consensual adolescent relationships under POCSO has deep and long-lasting socio-legal consequences. While the Act was enacted to safeguard minors, its rigid application often harms the very children it seeks to protect. The impact is not merely legal; it extends into education, family, psychology, and society at large.
1. Criminal record ruining boy’s future
In most cases, consent and mutual affection stay immaterial, boys are entangled and stuck in POCSO cases. Being of strict nature, after the arrest under the Act, the accused gets a permanent tag and is labelled as a sexual offender at a young age. Later, police verification
for abroad studies or job verifications become a tough job in itself. Government job opportunities are absolutely and permanently closed for them. Passport, visa, and study abroad processes become restricted and practically impossible for poor ones. A single consensual and mutual relationship becomes a lifelong punishment.
2. Dropouts due to arrest
In many cases, boys are denied admission to colleges due to pending criminal trials. Arrest under POCSO is immediate and non-bailable. Accused often spend weeks or months in observation homes before bail. This leads to Social stigma often forcing families to migrate and relocate, dropout from educational institutes due to trial pendency, educational institutions treat the accused (even if innocent) as a threat to campus and its safety, accused often is unable to sit in exams or fulfill attendance criteria due to custody or court dates.
Hence, for many education ends prematurely, shattering their hopes and dreams and ultimately losing faith over the system.
3. Girls facing honour-based violence
While boys suffer legal consequences, girls suffer moral and social consequences. In many patriarchal families girls are beaten or confined for “bringing shame” as a result of stereotype thinking and non acceptance of modern perceptions. Phones, outer world connections and social freedom are confiscated and restricted as a result. Families force these girls into early marriage to revive the pseudo honour and dignity of family. Most girls suffer emotional abuse and forced isolation inside their homes which is in itself the main root cause for such adolescents who find home outside home. In extreme cases, families file POCSO simply to restore the family’s prestige, even when the girl denies any assault, just to nullify such relationships.
4. Burden on courts
A large portion of POCSO caseload consists of consensual relationships. Courts across India have noted that the majority POCSO cases are “love over lust cases.” This contributes to delay in disposal of cases involving actual child sexual abuse, overburdening special courts made for lessening burden of traditional courts. Misallocation of police resources, harsh bail conditions even when the victim denies the offence are other harsh burdens over the system. As a result, genuine victims are denied speedy justice.
5. Loss of trust in legal system
When adolescents see that a benign relationship leads to police raids, arrests, threatening interrogations, false statements recorded under parental pressure. They lose faith in the criminal justice system. The makers of the society begin to view the law as a tool of control and family honour and a mechanism to punish emotions rather than crimes. This distrust endures into adulthood, weakening law-abiding behaviour.
6. Psychological impact: fear, trauma, stigma
Both partners suffer significant emotional harm.
Where trauma of being handcuffed and arrested, Anxiety while staying in observation homes, shame and social stigma of being labelled an “accused”, fear of imprisonment or lifelong stigma, Depression due to shattered future plans and dreams is a common yet 22 National crime records Bureau (NCRB), Crime in India Database.
Extract from newspaper “The Hindu”drastic impact on boys. Guilt for being the reason for the partner’s arrest (even when she was consenting), trauma of aggressive police questioning, stigma within own extended family, society and pressure to retract statements causes severe effect to girls. The girl often becomes a stranger in her own home. The psychological harm far exceeds the harm, if any, caused by the relationship itself. Besides losing faith in system, they tend to lose faith in relationships, love, affection, trust which in itself is a major psychological threat upon them.
7. Gendered outcomes (boys accused, girls treated as victims even if consenting)
POCSO is designed to be gender-neutral, but practically it is not. In almost all consensual cases, the boy becomes the accused and girl becomes the victim even if she insists she consented. Her agency, voice, and choice are ignored as law treats her as incapable of having feelings or exercising judgment This infantilizes teenage girls and criminalises teenage boys, a deeply gender-skewed outcome that contradicts modern understandings of adolescent development. Due to this very reason, many families treat POCSO as a weapon to shield their personal grudges and for monetary gains.
When affection between teenagers is punished as a crime, justice loses sight of humanity. If the law refuses to acknowledge adolescent agency, it risks silencing their voice and freedom. The aim of POCSO was protection, not prosecution of young love. We cannot safeguard children by criminalising their growing years. Between innocence and adulthood lies adolescence, a space the law must navigate with compassion, not fear which must be protected at all costs.
COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE
Protection without understanding often turns into punishment. Common International Themes:
● Mandatory Reporting: Many countries have laws requiring specific professionals (teachers, doctors, social workers) or all citizens to report suspected child abuse.
● Child-Centric Justice: There’s a growing global trend towards specialized, non-traumatic legal procedures. Models like the Barnahus (found in Nordic countries and gaining ground in Europe and the US) integrate investigation, medical care, and counseling in a single, child-friendly setting.
● Age of Consent Nuances: Unlike India’s fixed age of 18, many countries have a lower age of consent (often 16), but include “age-gap” exceptions or “close-in-age” defenses to protect teenagers in non-exploitative, consensual relationships.
● Addressing Online Abuse: Virtually all developed nations are strengthening their laws to combat online child sexual exploitation, with efforts focused on identifying offenders, taking down harmful content, and international cooperation.
● Offender Registries: Many countries maintain public or non-public sex offender registries and implement monitoring programs to prevent re-offense.
The international perspective on India’s POCSO Act reveals that while it is largely seen as a progressive law aligned with international standards like the UNCRC, it has both strengths and challenges when compared to other nations’ laws. POCSO is notable for its comprehensive child-centric approach, special courts, gender-neutrality, and detailed definitions of offenses, which are often considered more advanced than in some neighboring countries. Similarly, other countries also follow a variety of legal approaches to child
protection, all aiming to align with the core principles of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), but with significant differences in legal frameworks, enforcement, and integration of services.
REFORMS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A three-judge Supreme Court bench headed by the then, Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud had sought the Centre’s views on whether the ‘Romeo-Juliet law’, which is in operation in many countries in cases of consensual teenage sex, could be applied to such cases in India. Since early 2000s, many countries like Canada, UK, USA, Australia have adopted the Romeo-Juliet law to dispose of cases involving consensual adolescent relationships where the age gap doesn’t indicate exploitation. An adult is outside the ambit of the traditional laws dealing with sexual assault on women. The Romeo-Juliet law as an exception, protects the boy from arrest if the age difference between the boy and the girl who have engaged in consensual sex is not more than four years.
Courts have repeatedly criticised police for blindly registering POCSO FIRs even when the girl says it was consensual and there’s clear evidence of a relationship or where families file the complaint due to honour, caste, prestige or control. Hence, there is a need to introduce a mandatory preliminary assessment by either:
● Child Welfare Police Officer (CWPO)
● Counsellor
● Social Worker
● District Child Protection Unit (DCPU)
which would differentiate abuse from mutual affection before criminal charges are invoked.
Legislative reform alone is insufficient. Police officers and families must be sensitised that POCSO is not a moral policing tool and Honour-based violence cannot be justified through FIRs. Teenage love must not be treated as a crime. Training modules should be created and mandated for students from basic school levels to inculcate values of morality and decency.
Students must not be kept devoid of sex education, good and bad touch, emotional intelligence. School counsellors must be properly qualified and open for discussions. Many FIRs arise out of Inter-caste relationships, Inter-religion relationships, Honour-based motives, Fear of social shame, Monetary extortion and attempts to force early marriage.
Amendments must be introduced which impose stricter penalties for malicious prosecution especially when the victim denies assault or evidence shows a consensual relationship or where FIR is motivated by caste or honour concerns. This will deter families from misusing a child-protection law for personal or honour based motives.
Counselling and Mediation Mechanism must be preferred upon immediate arrest. In consensual cases, the first response should be family counselling, therapeutic intervention, guidance and counselling of adolescents and parents. Some High Courts have already recommended counselling-first models, which must now be codified into the statute.
Reform doesn’t mean lowering protections but to make them judiciously wise, fair and practical. A modernised POCSO law must recognise the difference between Protecting childhood and Criminalising adolescence or relationships. India needs a framework which 10
protects minors from predators while respecting their emotional reality, agency and developmental needs of teenagers.
CONCLUSION
Adolescence is not a crime; it is a phase of learning, mistakes and discovery. The intent of the law should be justice, not fear.
The law once enacted for the benefit of adolescents has become a weapon to kill their adolescence. The misuse of POCSO in consensual teenage relationships reflects a deeper societal discomfort. While the Act remains vital for protecting children from sexual offences, its rigid application in cases of mutual, non-exploitative teenage love undermines its very purpose. It criminalises young boys, silences young girls and drastically distorts the actual meaning of justice.
What India needs is not the abandonment of POCSO law but a more nuanced and compassionate implementation, one that distinguishes between predatory conduct and adolescent curiosity. Only then the law could truly protect rather than punish the ones for whose protection it was created.
