Court calls for legislative amendments to prevent misuse of POCSO Act in consensual relationships between adolescents near the age of majority.
In a landmark judgment, the Rajasthan High Court (Jaipur Bench), presided by Justice Anil Kumar Upman, has quashed the FIR against Aryan, accused of kidnapping and sexual offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. The case involved allegations of aggravated penetrative sexual assault and kidnapping, but the court found no substantive evidence to support these charges.
The judgment highlights the need for legislative and judicial discretion in distinguishing between predatory sexual abuse and consensual adolescent intimacy. Justice Upman emphasized the importance of not mechanically applying the stringent provisions of the POCSO Act in cases of consensual relationships near the age of majority. The court noted that such application leads to misuse, societal stigma, and unnecessary criminalization of youth.
Aryan, a 19-year-old, was accused of accompanying a 17-year-old girl who voluntarily left her home. The victim, along with her brother, was present in court and expressed no intention to prosecute Aryan, stating that there was no sexual abuse or coercion. The court acknowledged the victim's statements, which consistently denied any sexual activity or inducement.
Justice Upman referenced the Supreme Court's ruling in S. Varadarajan v. State of Madras, which distinguishes between "taking" a minor and a minor "accompanying" an accused voluntarily. The court applied this principle, noting the absence of any evidence of active inducement by Aryan.
The judgment also critiques the investigative agency's decision to file charges under the POCSO Act despite the victim's categorical denial and lack of corroborative medical evidence. Justice Upman expressed concerns over the misuse of the POCSO Act, which is intended to protect children from sexual exploitation, not to penalize consensual relationships between adolescents.
The court urged legislative bodies to consider amendments to the POCSO Act, including the introduction of close-age exemptions or "Romeo-Juliet" clauses. These amendments would help prevent the criminalization of consensual adolescent relationships and align the statute with the lived realities of adolescent autonomy.
Furthermore, the judgment calls for judicial vigilance against the misuse of the POCSO Act and similar laws. It suggests that both the Bar and the judiciary play crucial roles in ensuring that the law serves its protective purpose without being misused for personal vendettas or societal norms.
The Rajasthan High Court's decision sets a precedent for a more nuanced approach in cases involving adolescents close to the age of majority, advocating for a balanced application of the law that protects youth while recognizing their autonomy.
Bottom Line:
The prosecution under the POCSO Act must not be mechanically invoked in cases involving consensual relationships between adolescents close in age; legislative and judicial discretion is necessary to distinguish between predatory sexual abuse and consensual adolescent intimacy.
Statutory provision(s): Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 - Section 528, Section 137(2), Section 96, Section 64(2)(m); Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Sections 5(l)/6, Section 3/4.
Aryan v. State of Rajasthan, (Rajasthan)(Jaipur Bench) : Law Finder Doc id # 2848991
