POCSO Act never intended to treat adolescent boy as offender: Madras HC

The Madras High Court has said thePOCSO Act does not intend to punish an adolescent boy forentering into a relationship with a minor girl and batted forparental and societal support for the couple ''in the grips ofbiological changes.'' Justice N Anand Venkatesh observed that while the Act wasbrought in to protect children from sexual offences, a largearray of cases were arising on the basis of complaints beingfiled by families of adolescents and teenagers involved inromantic relationships.

Therefore,the ''legislature has to keep pace with changingsocietal needs'' and bring amendments to the Act, he said whilequashing criminal proceedings against an autorickshaw driverfacing charges under the Protection of Children from SexualOffences (POCSO) Act for marrying a minor.

''The scheme of the Act clearly shows that it did notintend to bring within its scope or ambit, cases of the naturewhere adolescents or teenagers involved in romanticrelationships are concerned,'' the judge said.

He observed that the provisions of the POCSO Act, as itstands today, would surely make the acts of the boy an offencedue to its stringent nature.

Punishing an adolescent boy who enters into arelationship with a minor girl by treating him as an offenderwas never the objective of the POCSO Act, he said.

''An adolescent boy and girl who are in the grips of theirhormones and biological changes and whose decision-makingability is yet to fully develop, should essentially receivethe support and guidance of their parents and the society atlarge,'' the court observed.

An adolescent boy caught in a situation like this willsurely have no defense if the criminal case is taken to itslogical end, the judge added.

Referring to the victim girl's earlier statement, he saidshe ''has clearly stated that she was the one who insisted thatthe 2nd Respondent take her away from her home and marry herdue to the pressure exerted by her parents.'' With the parents of the girl or the family subsequentlylodging a complaint, the accused is booked under the POCSOAct, the judge said.

Invariably the boy gets arrested and thereafter, ''hisyouthful life comes to a grinding halt.'' Such a person who is sent to prison in a case of thisnature will be persecuted throughout his life.

''It is high time that the legislature takes intoconsideration cases of this nature involving adolescentsinvolved in relationships and swiftly bring in necessaryamendments under the Act.'' The judge said the legislature has to keep pace with thechanging societal needs and bring about necessary changes inlaw and more particularly, in a stringent law like the POCSOAct.

He pointed out at the de facto complainant, mother of thegirl, as well as the latter jointly seeking for quashing ofthe proceedings against the man, also facing charges ofkidnap under the IPC, was ''peculiar.'' The mother had insisted that ''let bygones be bygones'' andhad wanted her daughter to settle down, the court observed.

The judge said there can be no second thought as to theseriousness of offences under the POCSO Act and the object itseeks to achieve.

However, it was also imperative for the Court to draw thethin line that demarcates the nature of acts that should notbe made to fall within the scope of the Act.

''...for such is the severity of the sentences providedunder the Act, justifiably so, that if acted upon hastily orirresponsibly, it could lead to irreparable damage to thereputation and livelihood of youth whose actions would havebeen only innocuous,'' he said.

''What came to be a law to protect and render justice tovictims and survivors of child abuse, can become a tool inthe hands of certain sections of the society to abuse theprocess of law,'' the judge noted.

Referring to studies, he said adolescence is associatedwith many psychosocial and developmental challenges, includingthe processing of intense emotions and ''first loves''.

Regarding the present case, the court said ''the offencesare purely individual/personal in nature'' and involved thepersons concerned and their families only.

The court said the second respondent was working as anautorickshaw driver to eke out his livelihood and quashing theproceedings would not affect any overriding public interest inthe case.

It would in fact pave the way for both of them to settledown in their life and look for better future prospects, thecourt said.