Will Expose Minors To Exploitation: IA In Supreme Court Opposes Lowering POCSO Consent Age To 16

An Intervention Application has been filed before the Supreme Court in the suo motu proceedings titled 'In Re: Right to Privacy of Adolescents' , opposing any proposal to reduce the age of consent under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, from 18 years to 16 years.

The application has been filed by Social Activist Svati Goyal, who is also a researcher and writer engaged in child rights and child protection issues.

Goyal seeks permission to intervene solely in the public interest, contending that lowering the age of consent "would defeat the object of the Act, undermine the Constitutional mandate to protect children, and expose them to grave risk of exploitation."

The application notes that the Supreme Court's continuing proceedings concern broader systemic issues relating to adolescent well-being, implementation of the POCSO Act and adolescent education.

It states that discussions concerning the age of consent have arisen in related judicial and policy discourse and seeks to assist the Court by placing submissions supporting a "sensitive, reformative, and child-centric implementation" of the existing legal framework.

According to the IA, the POCSO Act was enacted as a comprehensive child-friendly legislation protecting every person below 18 years from sexual offences by making consent legally irrelevant.

It argues that the law is aligned with the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006, constitutional guarantees and India's international obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

The applicant contends that reducing the age of consent would dilute the Act's "bright-line rule", create ambiguity capable of being exploited by perpetrators and make it easier to portray cases of grooming, coercion or abuse as consensual relationships.

The IA further contends that relaxing the threshold to 16 could severely weaken deterrence, shifting the target age of abuse downward. It notes that this would expose 13-14-year-olds to heightened risks, "since grooming characteristically targets children well below legal thresholds."

It argues that such a change would undermine constitutional protections under Articles 14, 21 and 39(f), which require equal protection, dignity and safeguards against exploitation for children.

The application further submits that India's socio-cultural realities, including child marriage, limited adolescent health services and gender inequalities, make any reduction in the age threshold unsafe.

It claims such a move could normalise early sexual activity, increase teenage pregnancies, undermine the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act and adversely affect child development.

Instead of lowering the age of consent, the application argues that concerns arising from consensual adolescent relationships can be addressed through the existing legal framework.

It points to Section 15 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, which provides for preliminary assessments involving children aged 16-18 accused of heinous offences, and refers to the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights' guidelines issued pursuant to the Supreme Court's decision in Barun Chandra Thakur v. Master Bholu.

The plea also opposes the adoption of any "close-in-age" or "Romeo-Juliet" exemption, arguing that such an approach could be misused in India due to the absence of universal sexual-health education, adolescent health services and comparable enforcement infrastructure, thereby making prosecution of child marriages and exploitation more difficult.

In support of its submissions, the applicant has annexed and referred to a report titled "Intrusion on Civilization: Lowering the Age of Consent - Analysing Its Impact," which, according to the plea, examines the jurisprudential, constitutional and socio-cultural implications of lowering the age of consent under the POCSO Act.

The application further informs the Court that the applicant has filed a similar intervention application in Nipun Saxena v. Union of India concerning the same issue.

Among its prayers, the applicant has sought permission to intervene and has requested the Supreme Court to tag the present suo motu proceedings with Writ Petition (Civil) No. 565 of 2012, Nipun Saxena v. Union of India & Ors. and other connected matters raising the issue of the age of consent under the POCSO Act.

Case Title: In Re: Rights to Privacy of Adolescents