'POCSO Act Not A Tool To Enforce Society's Outdated Moral Codes': Orissa High Court Grants Interim Bail To Accused To Marry Victim

The Orissa High Court has recently held that the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act ('POCSO Act') cannot be used as a tool for enforcing outdated moral codes or to criminalise adolescent romantic relationships in order to deter “socially non-conforming behaviour” irrespective of it being consensual in nature.The Single Bench of Dr. Justice Sanjeeb Kumar Panigrahi accentuated the need for differentiation between genuine cases of victimisation and instances of consensual romantic relationship between close-aged adolescents. It further observed –“The Court must therefore distinguish between cases where a complaint reflects genuine violation of bodily autonomy and cases where the law is invoked to discipline or deter consensual but socially nonconforming behavior. The intention of the legislation is not to provide a tool for enforcing outdated moral codes but to serve as a shield against exploitation and abuse.”Case BackgroundThe victim lodged an FIR against the petitioner under Sections 376(1) (rape)/ 376(2)(n) (repeated rape on the same woman)/ 313 (causing miscarriage without consent)/ 323 (voluntarily causing hurt)/ 294 (obscene acts)/ 417 (cheating)/ 344 (wrongful confinement)/ 506 (criminal intimidation) of IPC read with Section 6 (aggravated penetrative sexual assault) of the POCSO Act alleging that he kept sexual relationship with her since 2019 on the pretext of marriage leading to pregnancy in 2020 which was allegedly terminated by the petitioner. However, the relationship still continued and another pregnancy occurred. She further alleged that on 29.12.2022, the petitioner forcibly had sex with her. Upon confrontation by her father, the petitioner and his family members allegedly abused, assaulted and issued threats. The petitioner, however, pleaded innocence and asserted that he has been falsely entangled in the criminal case after he refused to marry the victim, who was a minor at the relevant time. Subsequently, due to the intervention of certain local gentries, the matter was amicably resolved between the parties as the families of both the sides mutually agreed for their marriage. The petitioner expressed his consent for the marriage and undertook to solemnize the marriage upon his release. Thus, he prayed for his release on interim bail for a period of one month for the said purpose which was vehemently opposed by the State considering the gravity of the allegations.POCSO Act doesn't aim to criminalize 'youthful romance' Having regard for the facts of the case, the Court opined that this matter needs a nuanced and contextual approach instead of mechanical application of statutory provisions. In this case, there was a consensual relationship between two individuals who were very proximate in their respective ages. It was also noted that both of them shared a personal bond before filing of the criminal case.“While the statutory mandate under the POCSO Act and relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code aims to safeguard minors and deter sexual offences, judicial discretion must also take into account the evolving social realities where romantic relationships between adolescents or young adults often take form outside the rigid structures of marriage or parental approval,” it added.Justice Panigrahi made it clear that the purpose of the law is not to criminalize youthful romance especially when there exists no apparent element of coercion, exploitation, or abuse of trust. “Where the age difference is negligible and the relational dynamic does not suggest a disparity in authority or influence, courts must be cautious in treating such relationships as inherently criminal. The rigidity of statutory interpretation must not override the requirement for justice to be humane contextual and proportionate.”Need for judicial approval of 'Romeo and Juliet Clauses'The Court shed light on the 'Romeo and Juliet clauses' which acknowledge romantic adolescent relationships and do not criminalize all technical violations of age-of-consent laws. However, it was clarified that though such clauses are relevant across various jurisdictions of the world, it has not been formally recognised in India.“Such provisions reflect a recognition that the spirit of the law is to protect vulnerable individuals and not to punish consensual peer relationships that may temporarily fall afoul of the age criteria. Although our legal system may not expressly incorporate these principles in legislative text, judicial reasoning rooted in equity and proportionality may well draw inspiration from such doctrines,” it nevertheless opined.Criminalisation as a proxy for familial disapprovalThe Bench acknowledged that in cases involving young adults, especially where the relationship is not formally sanctioned by families, legal proceedings may become a proxy for familial disapproval rather than a genuine invocation of victimhood.“Parental objections sometimes arise not from a concern for protection but from a desire to enforce...

'POCSO Act Not A Tool To Enforce Society's Outdated Moral Codes': Orissa High Court Grants Interim Bail To Accused To Marry Victim

Jyoti Prakash Dutta

Tags