Back
The has called upon the to recommend amendments to the , specifically to address cases involving minor couples, citing the need to align the law with India's social realities. A bench of Justice Atul Sreedharan and Justice Achal Sachdev observed that strictly applying the Act could, in certain circumstances, “advance injustice rather than justice,” particularly where a relationship has resulted in the birth of a child.
The Court’s direction came while allowing a petition filed by a man accused in a pending POCSO case, seeking the production of a girl with whom he had eloped and who subsequently gave birth to his child. The girl’s father and the State claimed her date of birth as , making her about 15 years old at the time of the petition. However, no school-issued date-of-birth certificate or birth certificate from a municipal authority or panchayat was placed on record. An assessed her age at approximately 18 years. Relying on , the bench held the girl to be a major. As she expressed a desire to live with the man, the Court allowed the petition and permitted her to leave with him.
Court Flags Conflict Between Law and Human Development
The bench made significant observations about the tension between legal rigidity and social realities. “Undoubtedly, . However, if this principle is applied in a purely pedantic manner, the implementation of the POCSO Act may, in certain factual situations, result in consequences which may appear to advance injustice rather than justice,” the bench remarked. The Court noted that the present case disclosed a conflict between human development and the rigors of law, emphasizing that it is natural for a child of about 15 years to be attracted to another person upon attaining a certain degree of physical and emotional maturity.
The Court added that while enacting the POCSO Act, “it does not appear that sufficient regard was given to the social realities prevailing in India, where a considerable section of the population remains illiterate or semiliterate and may not even be aware of the rights guaranteed to them under law and the Constitution, much less of the duties, obligations and legal consequences arising therefrom.”
Illiteracy and Education Gaps Come Under Scrutiny
The bench expressed serious concern over the girl’s inability to read a Hindi newspaper in the courtroom. She admitted that she could only sign and could not write anything more in Hindi. Against this backdrop, the Court observed that the quality of the State education system was, “to put it mildly, a matter of serious concern.” It questioned why the girl had discontinued her education after Class V and why the State had been unable to ensure that she continued studying. The Court emphasized that the State must ensure minors remain meaningfully engaged in education until they attain majority and receive adequate opportunities to acquire vocational skills and become self-reliant.
Calls for Judicial Discretion and Alternative Punishment
The High Court noted that the legislature has remained silent on the issue despite the possibility of injustice arising from the strict application of the POCSO Act. “This issue perhaps has already been raised before the legislature, which is responsible for ensuring that appropriate changes are made in the law. Yet, the legislature appears to have remained consistently silent on the matter,” the bench said. The Court therefore directed the Law Commission to examine these factors and recommend suitable amendments.
Specifically, the Court suggested that possible amendments could include vesting Special Judges with in exceptional cases to consider the circumstances while determining the appropriate punishment. It also asked the Commission to examine alternative forms of punishment, including , where a family formed in circumstances arising from ignorance of the POCSO Act risks being unnecessarily disrupted. The Court questioned whether imprisoning the accused, who was responsible for the child’s care, would ultimately leave the responsibility for maintaining the girl and her child to the State. “The law must remain dynamic and capable of rendering complete justice having regard to the peculiar facts of each case,” the bench observed.
Allowed; Trial to Proceed Independently
On the merits of the petition, the Court found the girl to be a major based on the and the absence of conflicting documentary evidence. Since she willingly chose to live with the man, the Court directed her release in his custody. However, the bench clarified that the trial court dealing with the pending POCSO case would not consider its factual observations in the proceedings. It directed the trial court to deal with the matter strictly in accordance with law and solely on the basis of the evidence led and recorded in those proceedings.
A copy of the High Court’s order has been sent to the Law Commission for its consideration. The development marks a significant judicial push for legislative reform in the POCSO framework, particularly regarding the treatment of minor couples and the need to balance legal consequences with India’s socio-economic realities.
