Concerns have been raised by the Orissa High Court regarding the potential abuse of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act), particularly with regard to the prosecution of young men involved in romantic relationships with each other when they were still teenagers.
A number of petitions requesting the suspension of criminal proceedings under the strict legislation were granted by Justice Sibo Sankar Mishra’s Single Bench.
“The POCSO Act was enacted with the ultimate objective of prohibiting non-consensual and forced sexual relationships with children, including child sexual abuse and sexual harassment,” the bench noted, according to Live Law. The POCSO Act’s strict regulations have helped to significantly lower the number of cases of sexual assault against minors, but they have also increased the number of retaliatory lawsuits, with fictitious claims being brought under the act against specific people. But the legislature never intended to criminalise romantic relationships between young adults.
The Court was sitting in session on a number of petitions filed under Section 482 of the CrPC, which sought to set aside the POCSO Act’s criminal proceedings and FIRs against several individuals in various cases of sexual activity resulting from teenage romantic relationships or marriage-promising relationships. When the alleged offences were committed, the victims in each of these cases were under the age of majority, or eighteen.
It is concerning that more and more young people who were in romantic relationships with one another are becoming victims of offences under the POCSO Act. When a teenage romance develops into a consensual cohabitation, the girl frequently reports being raped because of pressure from her family, fear of society, or the boy’s refusal to get married. The criminal case is filed because having sex with a minor is regarded as “statutory rape,” the bench continued.
Judge Mishra formulated the crucial question for consideration as to whether the High Court can quash criminal proceedings, particularly in heinous cases like rape, on the basis of mutual settlement between parties, Live Law reported. This is because in all of the cases, the parties claimed to have settled their disputes and they do not intend to file further lawsuits.
The possibility of obtaining a conviction is unlikely given the victims’ lack of desire to pursue the case further, and it could also have a negative impact on their happy marriage and family life, as well as the mental, emotional, and educational health of any children that may come from their union, the judge stated.
He added that carrying out the prosecution and punishment process could have the unintended and counterproductive consequence of punishing the victim as well, which could be contrary to the Act’s goal and purpose.
