Supreme Court Backs Romeo‑Juliet Clause in POCSO Act
- Sakshi Mishra
- Feb 4
- 3 min read
New Delhi, January 10, 2026. In a notable update from India’s apex judicial body, the Supreme Court has urged the Union Government to explore the possibility of adding a “Romeo-Juliet clause” to the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. This initiative aims to safeguard authentic consensual relationships among adolescents from being instantly classified as grave criminal activities under existing legislation. The POCSO Act was established in 2012 to create a robust legal structure aimed at safeguarding minors (defined as individuals under 18 years) against sexual abuse, exploitation, and attacks. This legislation categorises any sexual interaction involving a person under 18 as a criminal offence, regardless of whether consent was given.
This stringent protection based on age stems from India's dedication to upholding international child rights norms, including the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.
The Romeo-Juliet clause is a legal provision that serves as an exception to rigid statutory rape regulations, protecting consensual sexual connections between teenagers who are relatively similar in age, thus preventing them from being automatically labelled as offenders. This phrase is derived from Shakespeare’s tale of Romeo and Juliet, which signifies youthful romance.
In other countries, such provisions generally apply when:
Both individuals are minors or are of similar ages (for instance, within a few years of each other),
And the sexual encounter was agreed upon mutually and willingly.
In the ongoing discussions in India, one suggested approach indicates that if one individual is at least 16 years old and the age difference does not exceed approximately three years, criminal prosecution should not be initiated.
This recommendation emerged from a Supreme Court ruling dated January 9-10, 2026, issued by a panel including Justices Sanjay Karol and N. K. Singh. The court was reviewing an appeal made by the Uttar Pradesh State concerning a decision by the Allahabad High Court related to a POCSO matter.
In an additional remark, the bench encouraged the Union Government to consider adding the Romeo-Juliet provision to the POCSO Act to prevent its exploitation, particularly in situations where families lodge complaints solely to contest genuine teenage romances.
1. Misapplication of the POCSO Law:
The judiciary pointed out that the POCSO Act, which aims to shield children from harm, is being improperly applied in situations where adolescents engaged in consensual romantic relationships are regarded as offenders. Numerous reports indicate that such instances are often brought forth by parents who disapprove of the relationships rather than by the genuine victims of mistreatment.
2. Criminalisation of Reciprocal Teenage Relationships:
According to the existing legislation, any consensual sexual activities among minors are deemed offences since the law does not acknowledge consent for individuals under 18. Consequently, young couples are subjected to severe legal repercussions, even though neither individual has acted in a predatory manner.
Safeguards Young People from Unjust Criminalisation:
Advocates claim that young individuals engaged in consensual relationships ought to be shielded from enduring stigma or criminal records solely due to strict age criteria.
Stops Abuse of Legal Provisions:
This provision can deter families from exploiting the POCSO Act for personal vendettas or to assert moral dominance.
Conforms to Global Standards:
Numerous regions around the globe include close-in-age allowances within their statutory rape legislation to strike a balance between safeguarding and the independence of teenagers.
Risk of Undermining Child Safeguards:
Opponents argue that allowing any deviation from the 18-year age limit may compromise the robust protective measures put in place to shield children from manipulation, grooming, and abuse.
ocio‑Legal Complexity in India:
Adjusting or reducing legal consent requirements could prove challenging in a society characterised by diverse maturity levels among young people.
Potential for Confusion:
Critics are concerned that specific exemptions could be misinterpreted or improperly enforced in legal settings, thereby jeopardising the safety of children as a whole.
The court’s approval of a Romeo-Juliet provision has not altered the legal framework at this point. It signals a need for changes in legislation, indicating that it is up to Parliament to determine if it will create and implement such a modification.
conlusion
At the same time, legal professionals anticipate that if this provision is implemented, it could eliminate criminal charges in numerous instances presently pursued under POCSO, particularly when both adolescents are consenting and are of similar ages. This would represent a significant change in the way Indian laws address relationships among the younger population.
Comments