Love Or Crime? The Legal Dilemma Of Teenage Relationships Under POCSO

This is not a rare case, across India young people are being punished by laws made to protect them. This is because of the hard line drawn by the Indian legal system at age 18, treating everyone below the age of 18 years incapable of giving consent. This article explores how the current laws under POCSO, though framed with good intentions, criminalizes teenage sexual relationships, and why it requires reform.

The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO) was enacted to safeguard children from offences such as sexual assault, sexual harassment and pornography. It also provides for children-friendly judicial processes. The main objective of the act is to penalize offenders who manipulate, exploit or take advantage of children using their position of dominance. But in some cases, its strict application may lead to unintended criminalization of innocent individuals.

Section 2(d)[i] of the act defines “child” as any person below the age of eighteen years, which means that even if a person is mature enough to give informed consent but is just a few days or months away from turning eighteen, they are still legally considered a child.

This raises an important question: how does a person just a few days away from turning eighteen suddenly gains legal maturity to give consent and make decisions overnight? This issue frequently arises in consensual teenage relationships where the boy (often just a little older) may face serious consequences such as imprisonment and social stigma, even if the girl was equally willing. Such outcomes can be very unjust especially when there is no intent of exploitation involved.

According to an analysis by NGO Enfold India[ii], the POCSO cases from Assam, Maharashtra and West Bengal had revealed that 24.3% of all POCSO cases reported were “romantic cases”. 80.2% of cases were lodged by the girl's parents, when she pursued relationship against her family's will. These prosecutions are often led by the concerns over family “honour” and not actual harm to the child which leads to wrongful and unjust prosecution of the boys.

The Indian law recognizes that individuals between sixteen to eighteen years can be tried as adults in case of heinous crimes under the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015[iii]. But ironically, the same individuals are legally deemed not capable of consent when it comes to sexual autonomy.

While it is necessary to maintain an age threshold to determine minority of a person, in case of sexual consent, such threshold should be flexible. The adolescent age is such that the sexual curiosity and desires are caused by natural and physical changes. Strict laws that criminalize such consensual relationships often deny the realities of human development.

The Delhi High Court recently observed in the case of State v. Hitesh (2025)[iv], “Love is a fundamental human experience, and adolescents have the right to form emotional connections. The law should evolve to acknowledge and respect these relationships, as long as they are consensual and free from coercion. The focus of the law should be preventing exploitation rather than punishing love”.

Thus, it is evident that in recent times the courts have showed their willingness to recognize adolescent sexual relationships that are free from exploitation and coercion. However, in the absence of a clear and consistent legal framework, such cases are often left to judicial discretion leading to inconsistencies and potential unjust outcomes.

To overcome such issues, some countries have recognized the problems of adolescent relationships and addressed it through the “close-in-age exemptions” or the Romeo-Juliet Laws. The Romeo-Juliet law, inspired by the Shakespearean drama is a legal measure that protects people engaged in consensual sexual relationships from being prosecuted as criminals, as long as both the individuals are close in age.

In Canada[v], teens aged fourteen-fifteen years can consent for sexual relationship with someone who is not more than five years older to them. Similarly, in Philippines, sixteen year olds can consent to a partner when the age difference between the two is not more than three years.

These laws come with limitations. First- The protections given by the Romeo-Juliet law will only be applicable when the specified age gap criterion is met. If such age gap exceeds, the parties may face prosecution regardless of mutual consent. Second- This law is strictly applicable to consensual relationships. Non-consensual, abusive or exploitative acts fall outside the purview of this law.

The implementation of Romeo-Juliet laws in India faces several social, economic, and cultural challenges. These include the societal taboo around premarital sex, which remains deeply ingrained; health concerns arising from the lack of comprehensive sex education, leading to risks such as sexually transmitted infections and unintended pregnancies; and caste and religious tensions, as many cases are initiated by families objecting to inter-caste or inter-religious relationships.

The legal age of consent should be restored to sixteen years as it was prior to the enactment of POCSO in 2012. Additionally, the government should introduce a “close-age-gap” exemption by way of amendment to the Act to decriminalize consensual sexual relationships between adolescents, or between a minor and an individual not more than 3 years older. While deciding such cases the court shall take these factors into consideration:

- The existence of a sexual relationship between the individuals.

- The existence of mutual and informed consent.

- Absence of coercion, exploitation or manipulation.

- Age proximity between the parties.

- The accused's good conduct post the alleged offense.

By implementing these reforms, we can help prevent the unjust prosecution of young individuals — often boys — who are criminalized for consensual relationships, and spare them the long-term psychological and social consequences of criminal trials and imprisonment.

Alongside legal reforms, the government must promote sex education and awareness programs, especially among the youth. It would empower them to make informed decisions and also reduce the risk of Sexually Transmitted Diseases and unintended pregnancies.

Views are personal.

End notes