The Supreme Court has taken a significant and sensitive step in reshaping the way India addresses adolescent sexuality, consent, and legal safeguards under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Pocso) Act. The move stems from a complex case that laid bare the dissonance between legal statutes and lived realities.
In this particular case, a woman, now an adult and a mother, had eloped at the age of 14 with a 25-year-old man whom she later married. Despite the man’s conviction under Pocso and IPC provisions related to aggravated sexual assault, the woman consistently maintained that the act was consensual and not a crime. Her stance, coupled with her rejection by her family and emotional trauma caused not by the relationship but by the legal aftermath, prompted the Supreme Court to reassess the implications of the law.
A bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan ultimately ruled that no sentence be imposed on the man, citing the woman's autonomy, the harm inflicted by societal judgment, and the state's failure to protect her rights and dignity. The Court called this case an example of “complete failure” of the system — not a precedent, but a warning.
In response, the apex court:
-
Urged the Central Government to formulate a national sex education policy, citing the need for age-appropriate, scientifically accurate, and culturally relevant Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE) that addresses issues of consent, relationships, and reproductive health.
-
Directed the Union Ministry of Women and Child Development to form a committee with experts, amici curiae, and senior officers to evaluate the systemic misuse and rigid application of the Pocso Act in adolescent consensual relationships.
-
Ordered data review and institutional accountability mechanisms, suggesting more nuanced tracking of Pocso and child marriage cases, to distinguish between exploitation and consensual adolescent behavior.
-
Requested a detailed report from the Centre by July 25, 2025, on the recommendations and systemic reforms proposed.
This action also comes in light of the Calcutta High Court’s controversial 2023 judgment, where it acquitted the same accused and made sweeping comments about adolescents needing to “control their sexual urges.” The Supreme Court reversed that decision, calling the remarks violative of Article 21 (Right to Life), and restored the conviction — only to later withhold sentencing based on humanitarian grounds.
The amici curiae, senior advocates Madhavi Divan and Liz Mathew, emphasized how criminalizing consensual adolescent relationships not only leads to malicious prosecution by disapproving families, but also damages the best interests of adolescent girls and their children.
Various High Courts in recent years, such as in Delhi, Allahabad, Madras, and Calcutta, have similarly recognized that not all adolescent sexual activity should be viewed as criminal, especially when it is consensual and part of natural development. Several judges have stressed the misuse of the Pocso Act and called for distinguishing between coercion and genuine relationships.
By recommending that the woman be supported through education, vocational training, financial help, and her child’s welfare under Mission Vatsalya, the Court emphasized protection over punishment.
This intervention by the Supreme Court marks a crucial shift in India’s approach to child protection laws, consent, and adolescent rights. While the current law still criminalizes all sexual activity under 18 regardless of consent, the apex court's directive signals the beginning of a more compassionate and realistic legal framework, one that balances child safety with respect for adolescent autonomy.
