The Supreme Court on Tuesday stressed the importance of drawing a clear line between instances of rape and genuine romantic relationships involving young people on the cusp of adulthood.
A bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and R Mahadevan observed that in today’s world of co-educational institutions and universities, it is natural for youngsters to develop feelings for each other.
"Now, they develop feelings for each other. Can you say it is criminal to love? We have to keep a distinction between a criminal act like rape, etc., from this," the bench said.
"When there are genuine romantic cases, they like each other and they want to get married... Don't treat such cases the same as criminal cases," the bench added.
The observations came during a hearing on a petition questioning whether the age of consent under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — currently fixed at 18 years — should be lowered to 16.
Romantic cases vs criminal charges
The bench noted that when two adolescents are in a consensual relationship and wish to marry, treating such instances as criminal offences can be unjust. “Don’t equate genuine love with crime. We must keep in mind the realities of society,” Justice Nagarathna said.
The court also noted the hardships faced by young couples, particularly in cases where the girl’s parents lodge complaints under POCSO, resulting in the male partner being jailed. “This is the harsh reality. Many such cases are filed to cover up elopements,” the bench pointed out.
Senior advocate H S Phoolka, representing the petitioner organisation, urged the court to consider safeguards in such situations. The judges responded that it was for the police to determine whether a case involved kidnapping, trafficking, or a consensual relationship.
Phoolka further informed the court that another bench was already examining the broader issue of age of consent. The matter has now been listed for August 26, with Phoolka expected to place on record previous apex court rulings on similar concerns.
Centre’s stance on age of consent
The Union government has consistently defended the existing threshold of 18 years, describing it as a “deliberate, well-considered, and coherent” policy intended to protect minors from exploitation.
In its submissions in a related case, the Centre argued that reducing the age of consent or carving out exceptions for adolescent romance would not only be legally untenable but could also open dangerous loopholes for misuse.
(With PTI inputs)
A bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and R Mahadevan observed that in today’s world of co-educational institutions and universities, it is natural for youngsters to develop feelings for each other.
"Now, they develop feelings for each other. Can you say it is criminal to love? We have to keep a distinction between a criminal act like rape, etc., from this," the bench said.
"When there are genuine romantic cases, they like each other and they want to get married... Don't treat such cases the same as criminal cases," the bench added.
The observations came during a hearing on a petition questioning whether the age of consent under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — currently fixed at 18 years — should be lowered to 16.
Romantic cases vs criminal charges
The bench noted that when two adolescents are in a consensual relationship and wish to marry, treating such instances as criminal offences can be unjust. “Don’t equate genuine love with crime. We must keep in mind the realities of society,” Justice Nagarathna said.
The court also noted the hardships faced by young couples, particularly in cases where the girl’s parents lodge complaints under POCSO, resulting in the male partner being jailed. “This is the harsh reality. Many such cases are filed to cover up elopements,” the bench pointed out.
Senior advocate H S Phoolka, representing the petitioner organisation, urged the court to consider safeguards in such situations. The judges responded that it was for the police to determine whether a case involved kidnapping, trafficking, or a consensual relationship.
Phoolka further informed the court that another bench was already examining the broader issue of age of consent. The matter has now been listed for August 26, with Phoolka expected to place on record previous apex court rulings on similar concerns.
Centre’s stance on age of consent
The Union government has consistently defended the existing threshold of 18 years, describing it as a “deliberate, well-considered, and coherent” policy intended to protect minors from exploitation.
In its submissions in a related case, the Centre argued that reducing the age of consent or carving out exceptions for adolescent romance would not only be legally untenable but could also open dangerous loopholes for misuse.
(With PTI inputs)
You may also like
Crystal Palace shortlist new target as Eberechi Eze Arsenal medical plan emerges
Anthony Joshua's future becomes clear after Jake Paul fight snub
NATO jets scrambled as Vladimir Putin launches £320m hypersonic missile attack
Emirates cabin crew flies from Dubai to Kerala to surprise grandmother on her birthday
Missed graduating from DU? Here's your final chance to get that degree
