The Supreme Court’s May 2025 judgment in Re: Right to Privacy of Adolescents marks a rare moment of introspection within India’s legal system. By withholding sentencing in a POCSO conviction involving a consensual adolescent relationship, the Court recognized what many have long argued: that the law’s one-size-fits-all approach fails the very people it aims to protect.
At the heart of the case was a now-adult woman, once 14, who chose to be with a man significantly older. Despite the problematic power dynamic and legal constraints, she consistently asserted her agency, fighting legal battles for his release and raising their child alone. Her trauma, as revealed by a court-appointed committee, stemmed not from the relationship — but from the criminal justice system’s response: police, courtrooms, surveillance, abandonment.
While both the Calcutta High Court and Supreme Court attempted to deliver “complete justice,” they ultimately highlighted the systemic inadequacies and deep-seated paternalism that dominate conversations around adolescent sexuality. By criminalising all sexual activity under 18, the POCSO Act casts all adolescents as victims — and any sexual partner as a criminal — erasing young people’s agency and context.
Empirical data shows that nearly a quarter of POCSO cases involve consensual adolescent relationships, often in situations shaped by poverty, stigma, or the culturally embedded practice of child marriage. Yet courts continue to apply harsh legal standards, with little room for nuance.
It’s time the law distinguished exploitative relationships from those where adolescents are exercising their constrained agency. Recognising the consent of those above 16 — while still protecting against coercion, abuse of power, or exploitation — is a more realistic and just approach. Additionally, reforms must include life-skills education, psychosocial support, and systemic change to address the real vulnerabilities of adolescents.
The Supreme Court’s call for broader policy interventions — from comprehensive sexuality education to better data — signals a potential shift. But without legislative change, vulnerable teenagers will continue to face prosecution, humiliation, and abandonment for choosing intimacy over isolation.
Author: This news is edited by: Abhishek Verma, (Editor, CANON TIMES)
Authentic news.
