Editorial 1: ​​Young love

Context

The POCSO Act should not permit parental resistance that undermines the rights, autonomy, and protection of adolescents.

Introduction

The misuse of the POCSO Act has brought into focus a troubling conflict between child protection and adolescent autonomy. Judicial acknowledgment of this issue highlights how a law meant to prevent sexual exploitation is increasingly used to enforce parental authority. This distortion risks criminalising consensual relationships and undermining trust in the justice system.

Judicial Recognition of Misuse

• On January 9, the Supreme Court of India acknowledged the growing misuse of the POCSO Act.
• It recognised concerns raised by legal scholars, child rights experts, and young adults about families weaponising the law.
• Consensual adolescent relationships, especially involving young men, are being criminalised to enforce parental control.

Structural Flaws in the POCSO Framework

• The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act fixes a rigid age of consent at 18 years.
• Its strict liability model makes the minor’s consent legally irrelevant.
• Mandatory minimum sentences, meant for predatory crimes, enable indiscriminate prosecution.

Familial Control and Social Boundaries

• Families opposing relationships often file kidnapping and sexual assault charges.
• This is common in cases of elopement across caste or religious lines.
• The law struggles to distinguish consensual intimacy from coercive abuse, allowing state power to punish socially “undesirable” matches.

Law Commission and Judicial Responses

• The Law Commission of India highlighted these concerns in its 2023 report.
• While rejecting a lower age of consent, it warned against equating teenage intimacy with predatory violence.
• It recommended guided judicial discretion for cases involving adolescents aged 16–18.
• The Court has asked that its judgment be shared with the Law Secretary to help curb misuse.

Need for Non-Punitive Interventions

• Adolescents facing conflict between personal autonomy and family expectations lack support.
• There is a severe shortage of confidential counselling, sexuality education, and family mediation services.
• Over-reliance on policing and prosecution worsens vulnerability.
• Without investment in education, counselling, and legal reform, young couples remain exposed to familial retaliation and prosecutorial overreach.

Conclusion

Addressing this challenge requires balancing protection with proportionality. Legal reform, including judicial discretion, must be complemented by strong counselling, education, and family mediation mechanisms. Without shifting from a purely punitive approach, the state risks perpetuating harm, enabling familial misuse, and leaving adolescents vulnerable to overcriminalisation rather than safeguarding their rights.