Pocso wasn’t intended to penalise teens for romantic relations: HC
CHENNAI: The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (Pocso), 2012 does not intend to penalise adolescents or teenagers involved in romantic relationships, the Madras high court observed on Friday.
“What came to be a law to protect and render justice to victims and survivors of child abuse can become a tool in the hands of certain sections of the society to abuse the process of law,” Justice N Anand Venkatesh said in his order.
He made the observations while quashing a case wherein a teenage girl, a de facto complainant, sought that charges be dropped against an auto-rickshaw driver accused of marrying a minor. The girl said she had persuaded him to elope and get married and that the duo later consummated their marriage.
The man was facing trial for offences under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 6 (aggravated penetrative sexual assault) of the POCSO Act and Section 9 of the Prohibition of the Child Marriage Act following a complaint by the girl’s family.
The court also called for legislative changes while noting that “an adolescent boy who is sent to prison in a case of this nature will be persecuted throughout his life. The legislature has to keep pace with the changing societal needs and bring about necessary changes in law and more particularly in a stringent law such as the POCSO Act.”
Punishing an adolescent boy who enters into a relationship with a minor girl by treating him as an offender was never the objective of the POCSO Act, he said.
Child rights activists have also been seeking an alteration in the legislation to ensure the focus doesn’t deviate from genuine cases and doesn’t criminalise consensual sexual activity or relationships. “80% of the POCSO cases booked in Tamil Nadu are those related to elopement. The entire criminal justice system is getting clogged with these cases while the real cases are not getting the due attention they deserve,” Vidya Reddy, founder of Tulir, an organisation working on prevention and healing of child sexual abuse in India, said.
While citing various orders in similar cases and the Supreme Court’s observations on quashing non-compoundable offences, the court also referred to neurobiological studies, biosocial approach, behavioural sciences and first love.
“The court is not turning a blind eye to cases where the victim or survivor may, under the effect of trauma that they have undergone, tend to reconcile with the same by blaming themselves or convincing themselves that the element of consent was in fact present. Nor is this court scientifically justifying in toto, the genuineness or predicament of the accused in every case where it appears that the accused and victim child have been in a romantic relationship. That will depend on the facts and circumstances of each and every case,” the order read.
“While in principle it is good to revisit the age of consent and protect boys from being punished for sexual acts that aren’t criminal, our fear is that the changes shouldn’t be misused once again in serious cases of rape and victims compromising,” TN Child Rights Watch convener M Andrew Sesuraj said.