Revisiting Consent in the POCSO Act: Between Protection and Autonomy
Revisiting Consent in the POCSO Act: Between Protection and Autonomy
Revisiting Consent in the POCSO Act: Between Protection and Autonomy
Introduction:
Protection of Children from sexual offences Act, 2012 is India’s first comprehensive legislation that seeks to enforce child safety and curb sexual abuse, pornography, and sexual harassment, and also provide for the establishment of special courts for the trial of these matters. Empowered by Article 15 of the Indian Constitution which grants the government the authority to make provisions for the welfare of the state.
What is the main objective of POCSO act?
According to this act, a child is defined as anyone who has not yet reached 18 years of age. Hence, this act criminalizes any sexual act between minors or with a minor, without any exception. While this act adequately protects children from exploitation, it also restricts their autonomy. By establishing an age criterion, the law also attempts to protect minors who may not have the capacity to give informed consent; however, this fixed-age criterion is prominently misused nowadays.
Generally, laws related to sexual abuse or harassment are women-centric, but one of the distinct features of this act is that it is gender neutral, which means that boys and girls are equally protected.
POCSO Act contains provisions that makes the procedures under it child- friendly for victims. It contains provisions that the statement of the victim should be recorded at a child-friendly place, such as the home. This act also protects the identity of the victim. However, this law has various shortcomings, such as the criteria for the fixed age criterion, i.e., eighteen years. It is interesting to note that the initial draft for POCSO recognised the possibility of consensual relationships between sixteen to eighteen-year-olds, where the minor has the capacity to consent. But this provision was removed from the final draft.
What is the historical background of the POCSO Act?
In previous times, children did not have any rights, and their rights remained unheard. In the 1840s, the idea of special rights for children first emerged in France. The Law was enacted in France in 1841 to protect children in their workplace and grant them the right to education.
World War II caused untold suffering to thousands of children, and hence, after World War II, the world began to recognize the need for special rights to children. On 11 December 1946, the United Nations General Assembly established the United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund (UNICEF) to help the millions of children displaced and needed help after World War II.
The Universal Declaration of Children’s Rights, popularly known as the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) was ratified by India in December 1992, and hence, the government of India became obligated to implement the rights mentioned in the UNCRC. With the passage of time, the demand for children rights became aggressive and were widely demanded by the people of the country, which led to the enactment of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act in the year 2012.
Until the POCSO Act, the criminal acts of sexual offences against children were governed by the Indian Penal Code, 1862. Which mainly focused on women and did not have many safeguards for children.
Criminalization of minors’ consensual relationships:
Why is this law concerned with the age when it comes to determining consent? The notion behind this rule is that, it is believed that a child is not competent to give consent, as per their mental capacity. Because it is not developed enough to determine aspects and consequences of sexual behavior on their own.
For example, according to a few physiological studies, it is believed that a child of 10 years can give consent for something but lacks the underlying capacity to do so. The initial draft of POCSO recognized the possibility of consensual relationships from sixteen to eighteen, where the minor had the capacity to provide consent, but the provision was later removed from the final draft.
The POCSO Act uniformly criminalizes all sexual offences- where a minor is involved. And leaves no room for the consent of a minor. This is because determining the competence of the child, is not easy and sometimes not practical in some cases. And even if the consent is given freely, it is difficult to determine whether the consent is not manipulated by any adult. Hence, by criminalizing sexual acts involving individuals under the age of 18 years, it tries to safeguard minors who are not competent.
The Grey area of Consent:
The term “grey area” means a confused idea about consent, which is further amplified by the conflicting Supreme Court and High Court judgments. Ultimately, the judiciary has taken two different approaches to consent, which has created the ‘grey area of consent’.
Criminalization consensual relationships contains a scope of misuse, as it gives guardians and parents a tool for harassment. Generally, parents file a complaint when they disapprove of their child’s relationship. For example, in the case of Ajay Kumar v. state (NCT of Delhi)[1], a rape complaint was filed by a seventeen-year old’s father. And as the investigation proceeded, the child appeared before the court and pleaded for his release as they were married. It is observed that the parents who eventually disapprove of their children's relationship use this fixed age rule to drag the other party into court.
Firstly, it can be said that the courts have interpreted the POCSO Act in its literal meaning and have applied the fixed age rule without any exception. This has further created a rift between the personal laws and the POCSO Act. But since it is a special law, it always prevails over any other law. The Karnataka High Court has upheld this approach as it criminalizes the relationship between the minors where both parties consented to their relationship. Later in Maruthupandi v. State[2], the court held that penalties will be charged, regardless of the consent of the minor. Similarly, in the case of Ranjit Rajbaanshi v. State of West Bengal[3], the high court held that the consent of a minor “is not material at all”. All these cases have created an approach that the fixed age rule will be followed, and it has ignored all the loopholes and misuse of this law, which are causing miscarriage of justice.
Under the second circumstance, the courts try to determine the minor’s competence to consent under POCSO. For instance, in the case of R. Parthiban v. State[4], a man of 24 years was in love with a 17-year-old girl. When she turned 18, they married, and later the girl’s mother filed a rape case against the man, but the court ruled that the minor expressed clear free will to sexual intercourse and hence dismissed the plea.
Evidently, the courts' different approaches to the same thing have questioned the validity of the minor’s consent. Thus we can point out that courts have identified this grey area several times, but never dealt it properly.
A Way Forward:
As a solution to the above-mentioned problem, many have suggested lowering the age to 16 years from 18 years. But this will not solve the real problem because the real problem is not of age, but of competence. Lowering the age of consent from 18 to 16 years will legalise the consensual relationship but will again leave a very similar question: what will happen when a 15-year-old girl is in a consensual relationship? Even if the age is lowered, then also these relationships will be criminalized and this will raise the same problem of punishing young innocent adults.
Thus it must be said that age should not be the only factor to determine the competence of a child to give consent. Rather, a well-established framework should be developed where age is identified as merely one of the factors in determining the competence of giving the consent. And this approach should also include psychological competence.
For example- if a child of 17 years is in a relationship with a 19-year-old. And they have sexual intercourse with the consent of each other and while giving consent, the minor is well aware of its pros and cons. Then, this will be termed as an informed consent, and the other person should not be punished just because of the age of the minor. So by following this approach, the harassment will be curbed, and the POCSO act will also fulfill its purpose, which is to protect the child from sexual abuse.
What can we conclude from this?
We can conclude that the central aim of the Protection of Children from sexual offences Act,2012 (POCSO), is to protect children from sexual abuse, but now this act has evolved many loopholes including the fixed age rule under this law which criminalizes any sexual intercourse with or without consent of the minor. There is no room for consent relationship which limits sexual autonomy of children, and are now widely misused to punish young adults. This rule is also widely used by the relatives of the minor as a tool for harassment. Further, this has concluded that, how the fixed age rule has created a grey area, which has left a wide opened space for suggestions regarding judicial interpretations while dealing with the POCSO cases. Some of which are-
Initially, judges should adopt a valid interpretation of the POCSO Act when imposing punishment on all individuals found guilty under this law, irrespective of the minor’s consent. Secondly, over time, the judiciary must increasingly shift towards a purposive interpretation when determining the culpability of the accused under the Act.
Lastly the fixed age rule should be abolished, and the competence of the minor should be determined by the psychological competence of the child and by their free will, not just by age. Rather, age should just be one factor in order to determine the competence, not the only factor. By this approach, the act will serve its true objective and the minor will be able to assert their sexual autonomy with their free will.
References:
Case Laws
Ajay Kumar v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2022) 6 HCC (Del) 530.
Maruthupandi v. State (Madras), (2019) 4 HCC (Madras) 459.
Ranjit Rajbanshi v. State of W.B., Criminal Appeal No. 459 of 2018 (Calcutta HC).
R. Partiban v. State, Criminal Miscellaneous Petition Nos. 8645 and 8648 of 2022, dated on 7-7-2022 (Madras HC).
Journal Article
Prem Vinod Parwani, Revisiting Consent Under POCSO: From A ‘Fixed- Age’ to a ‘Competence- Based Standard, 16 NUJS L. Rev. 2 (2023).
Protection against misuse: on POCSO Act, adolescent sex, The Hindu (Dec. 20, 2025).
Disclaimer: This article is intended solely for educational and informational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy, reliability, and completeness of the information provided, ClearLaw.online, the author, and the publisher disclaim any liability for errors, omissions, or inadvertent inaccuracies. Readers are strongly advised to consult a qualified legal professional for guidance on any specific legal issue or matter.
Introduction:
Protection of Children from sexual offences Act, 2012 is India’s first comprehensive legislation that seeks to enforce child safety and curb sexual abuse, pornography, and sexual harassment, and also provide for the establishment of special courts for the trial of these matters. Empowered by Article 15 of the Indian Constitution which grants the government the authority to make provisions for the welfare of the state.
What is the main objective of POCSO act?
According to this act, a child is defined as anyone who has not yet reached 18 years of age. Hence, this act criminalizes any sexual act between minors or with a minor, without any exception. While this act adequately protects children from exploitation, it also restricts their autonomy. By establishing an age criterion, the law also attempts to protect minors who may not have the capacity to give informed consent; however, this fixed-age criterion is prominently misused nowadays.
Generally, laws related to sexual abuse or harassment are women-centric, but one of the distinct features of this act is that it is gender neutral, which means that boys and girls are equally protected.
POCSO Act contains provisions that makes the procedures under it child- friendly for victims. It contains provisions that the statement of the victim should be recorded at a child-friendly place, such as the home. This act also protects the identity of the victim. However, this law has various shortcomings, such as the criteria for the fixed age criterion, i.e., eighteen years. It is interesting to note that the initial draft for POCSO recognised the possibility of consensual relationships between sixteen to eighteen-year-olds, where the minor has the capacity to consent. But this provision was removed from the final draft.
What is the historical background of the POCSO Act?
In previous times, children did not have any rights, and their rights remained unheard. In the 1840s, the idea of special rights for children first emerged in France. The Law was enacted in France in 1841 to protect children in their workplace and grant them the right to education.
World War II caused untold suffering to thousands of children, and hence, after World War II, the world began to recognize the need for special rights to children. On 11 December 1946, the United Nations General Assembly established the United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund (UNICEF) to help the millions of children displaced and needed help after World War II.
The Universal Declaration of Children’s Rights, popularly known as the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) was ratified by India in December 1992, and hence, the government of India became obligated to implement the rights mentioned in the UNCRC. With the passage of time, the demand for children rights became aggressive and were widely demanded by the people of the country, which led to the enactment of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act in the year 2012.
Until the POCSO Act, the criminal acts of sexual offences against children were governed by the Indian Penal Code, 1862. Which mainly focused on women and did not have many safeguards for children.
Criminalization of minors’ consensual relationships:
Why is this law concerned with the age when it comes to determining consent? The notion behind this rule is that, it is believed that a child is not competent to give consent, as per their mental capacity. Because it is not developed enough to determine aspects and consequences of sexual behavior on their own.
For example, according to a few physiological studies, it is believed that a child of 10 years can give consent for something but lacks the underlying capacity to do so. The initial draft of POCSO recognized the possibility of consensual relationships from sixteen to eighteen, where the minor had the capacity to provide consent, but the provision was later removed from the final draft.
The POCSO Act uniformly criminalizes all sexual offences- where a minor is involved. And leaves no room for the consent of a minor. This is because determining the competence of the child, is not easy and sometimes not practical in some cases. And even if the consent is given freely, it is difficult to determine whether the consent is not manipulated by any adult. Hence, by criminalizing sexual acts involving individuals under the age of 18 years, it tries to safeguard minors who are not competent.
The Grey area of Consent:
The term “grey area” means a confused idea about consent, which is further amplified by the conflicting Supreme Court and High Court judgments. Ultimately, the judiciary has taken two different approaches to consent, which has created the ‘grey area of consent’.
Criminalization consensual relationships contains a scope of misuse, as it gives guardians and parents a tool for harassment. Generally, parents file a complaint when they disapprove of their child’s relationship. For example, in the case of Ajay Kumar v. state (NCT of Delhi)[1], a rape complaint was filed by a seventeen-year old’s father. And as the investigation proceeded, the child appeared before the court and pleaded for his release as they were married. It is observed that the parents who eventually disapprove of their children's relationship use this fixed age rule to drag the other party into court.
Firstly, it can be said that the courts have interpreted the POCSO Act in its literal meaning and have applied the fixed age rule without any exception. This has further created a rift between the personal laws and the POCSO Act. But since it is a special law, it always prevails over any other law. The Karnataka High Court has upheld this approach as it criminalizes the relationship between the minors where both parties consented to their relationship. Later in Maruthupandi v. State[2], the court held that penalties will be charged, regardless of the consent of the minor. Similarly, in the case of Ranjit Rajbaanshi v. State of West Bengal[3], the high court held that the consent of a minor “is not material at all”. All these cases have created an approach that the fixed age rule will be followed, and it has ignored all the loopholes and misuse of this law, which are causing miscarriage of justice.
Under the second circumstance, the courts try to determine the minor’s competence to consent under POCSO. For instance, in the case of R. Parthiban v. State[4], a man of 24 years was in love with a 17-year-old girl. When she turned 18, they married, and later the girl’s mother filed a rape case against the man, but the court ruled that the minor expressed clear free will to sexual intercourse and hence dismissed the plea.
Evidently, the courts' different approaches to the same thing have questioned the validity of the minor’s consent. Thus we can point out that courts have identified this grey area several times, but never dealt it properly.
A Way Forward:
As a solution to the above-mentioned problem, many have suggested lowering the age to 16 years from 18 years. But this will not solve the real problem because the real problem is not of age, but of competence. Lowering the age of consent from 18 to 16 years will legalise the consensual relationship but will again leave a very similar question: what will happen when a 15-year-old girl is in a consensual relationship? Even if the age is lowered, then also these relationships will be criminalized and this will raise the same problem of punishing young innocent adults.
Thus it must be said that age should not be the only factor to determine the competence of a child to give consent. Rather, a well-established framework should be developed where age is identified as merely one of the factors in determining the competence of giving the consent. And this approach should also include psychological competence.
For example- if a child of 17 years is in a relationship with a 19-year-old. And they have sexual intercourse with the consent of each other and while giving consent, the minor is well aware of its pros and cons. Then, this will be termed as an informed consent, and the other person should not be punished just because of the age of the minor. So by following this approach, the harassment will be curbed, and the POCSO act will also fulfill its purpose, which is to protect the child from sexual abuse.
What can we conclude from this?
We can conclude that the central aim of the Protection of Children from sexual offences Act,2012 (POCSO), is to protect children from sexual abuse, but now this act has evolved many loopholes including the fixed age rule under this law which criminalizes any sexual intercourse with or without consent of the minor. There is no room for consent relationship which limits sexual autonomy of children, and are now widely misused to punish young adults. This rule is also widely used by the relatives of the minor as a tool for harassment. Further, this has concluded that, how the fixed age rule has created a grey area, which has left a wide opened space for suggestions regarding judicial interpretations while dealing with the POCSO cases. Some of which are-
Initially, judges should adopt a valid interpretation of the POCSO Act when imposing punishment on all individuals found guilty under this law, irrespective of the minor’s consent. Secondly, over time, the judiciary must increasingly shift towards a purposive interpretation when determining the culpability of the accused under the Act.
Lastly the fixed age rule should be abolished, and the competence of the minor should be determined by the psychological competence of the child and by their free will, not just by age. Rather, age should just be one factor in order to determine the competence, not the only factor. By this approach, the act will serve its true objective and the minor will be able to assert their sexual autonomy with their free will.
References:
Case Laws
Ajay Kumar v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2022) 6 HCC (Del) 530.
Maruthupandi v. State (Madras), (2019) 4 HCC (Madras) 459.
Ranjit Rajbanshi v. State of W.B., Criminal Appeal No. 459 of 2018 (Calcutta HC).
R. Partiban v. State, Criminal Miscellaneous Petition Nos. 8645 and 8648 of 2022, dated on 7-7-2022 (Madras HC).
Journal Article
Prem Vinod Parwani, Revisiting Consent Under POCSO: From A ‘Fixed- Age’ to a ‘Competence- Based Standard, 16 NUJS L. Rev. 2 (2023).
Protection against misuse: on POCSO Act, adolescent sex, The Hindu (Dec. 20, 2025).
Disclaimer: This article is intended solely for educational and informational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy, reliability, and completeness of the information provided, ClearLaw.online, the author, and the publisher disclaim any liability for errors, omissions, or inadvertent inaccuracies. Readers are strongly advised to consult a qualified legal professional for guidance on any specific legal issue or matter.
Introduction:
Protection of Children from sexual offences Act, 2012 is India’s first comprehensive legislation that seeks to enforce child safety and curb sexual abuse, pornography, and sexual harassment, and also provide for the establishment of special courts for the trial of these matters. Empowered by Article 15 of the Indian Constitution which grants the government the authority to make provisions for the welfare of the state.
What is the main objective of POCSO act?
According to this act, a child is defined as anyone who has not yet reached 18 years of age. Hence, this act criminalizes any sexual act between minors or with a minor, without any exception. While this act adequately protects children from exploitation, it also restricts their autonomy. By establishing an age criterion, the law also attempts to protect minors who may not have the capacity to give informed consent; however, this fixed-age criterion is prominently misused nowadays.
Generally, laws related to sexual abuse or harassment are women-centric, but one of the distinct features of this act is that it is gender neutral, which means that boys and girls are equally protected.
POCSO Act contains provisions that makes the procedures under it child- friendly for victims. It contains provisions that the statement of the victim should be recorded at a child-friendly place, such as the home. This act also protects the identity of the victim. However, this law has various shortcomings, such as the criteria for the fixed age criterion, i.e., eighteen years. It is interesting to note that the initial draft for POCSO recognised the possibility of consensual relationships between sixteen to eighteen-year-olds, where the minor has the capacity to consent. But this provision was removed from the final draft.
What is the historical background of the POCSO Act?
In previous times, children did not have any rights, and their rights remained unheard. In the 1840s, the idea of special rights for children first emerged in France. The Law was enacted in France in 1841 to protect children in their workplace and grant them the right to education.
World War II caused untold suffering to thousands of children, and hence, after World War II, the world began to recognize the need for special rights to children. On 11 December 1946, the United Nations General Assembly established the United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund (UNICEF) to help the millions of children displaced and needed help after World War II.
The Universal Declaration of Children’s Rights, popularly known as the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) was ratified by India in December 1992, and hence, the government of India became obligated to implement the rights mentioned in the UNCRC. With the passage of time, the demand for children rights became aggressive and were widely demanded by the people of the country, which led to the enactment of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act in the year 2012.
Until the POCSO Act, the criminal acts of sexual offences against children were governed by the Indian Penal Code, 1862. Which mainly focused on women and did not have many safeguards for children.
Criminalization of minors’ consensual relationships:
Why is this law concerned with the age when it comes to determining consent? The notion behind this rule is that, it is believed that a child is not competent to give consent, as per their mental capacity. Because it is not developed enough to determine aspects and consequences of sexual behavior on their own.
For example, according to a few physiological studies, it is believed that a child of 10 years can give consent for something but lacks the underlying capacity to do so. The initial draft of POCSO recognized the possibility of consensual relationships from sixteen to eighteen, where the minor had the capacity to provide consent, but the provision was later removed from the final draft.
The POCSO Act uniformly criminalizes all sexual offences- where a minor is involved. And leaves no room for the consent of a minor. This is because determining the competence of the child, is not easy and sometimes not practical in some cases. And even if the consent is given freely, it is difficult to determine whether the consent is not manipulated by any adult. Hence, by criminalizing sexual acts involving individuals under the age of 18 years, it tries to safeguard minors who are not competent.
The Grey area of Consent:
The term “grey area” means a confused idea about consent, which is further amplified by the conflicting Supreme Court and High Court judgments. Ultimately, the judiciary has taken two different approaches to consent, which has created the ‘grey area of consent’.
Criminalization consensual relationships contains a scope of misuse, as it gives guardians and parents a tool for harassment. Generally, parents file a complaint when they disapprove of their child’s relationship. For example, in the case of Ajay Kumar v. state (NCT of Delhi)[1], a rape complaint was filed by a seventeen-year old’s father. And as the investigation proceeded, the child appeared before the court and pleaded for his release as they were married. It is observed that the parents who eventually disapprove of their children's relationship use this fixed age rule to drag the other party into court.
Firstly, it can be said that the courts have interpreted the POCSO Act in its literal meaning and have applied the fixed age rule without any exception. This has further created a rift between the personal laws and the POCSO Act. But since it is a special law, it always prevails over any other law. The Karnataka High Court has upheld this approach as it criminalizes the relationship between the minors where both parties consented to their relationship. Later in Maruthupandi v. State[2], the court held that penalties will be charged, regardless of the consent of the minor. Similarly, in the case of Ranjit Rajbaanshi v. State of West Bengal[3], the high court held that the consent of a minor “is not material at all”. All these cases have created an approach that the fixed age rule will be followed, and it has ignored all the loopholes and misuse of this law, which are causing miscarriage of justice.
Under the second circumstance, the courts try to determine the minor’s competence to consent under POCSO. For instance, in the case of R. Parthiban v. State[4], a man of 24 years was in love with a 17-year-old girl. When she turned 18, they married, and later the girl’s mother filed a rape case against the man, but the court ruled that the minor expressed clear free will to sexual intercourse and hence dismissed the plea.
Evidently, the courts' different approaches to the same thing have questioned the validity of the minor’s consent. Thus we can point out that courts have identified this grey area several times, but never dealt it properly.
A Way Forward:
As a solution to the above-mentioned problem, many have suggested lowering the age to 16 years from 18 years. But this will not solve the real problem because the real problem is not of age, but of competence. Lowering the age of consent from 18 to 16 years will legalise the consensual relationship but will again leave a very similar question: what will happen when a 15-year-old girl is in a consensual relationship? Even if the age is lowered, then also these relationships will be criminalized and this will raise the same problem of punishing young innocent adults.
Thus it must be said that age should not be the only factor to determine the competence of a child to give consent. Rather, a well-established framework should be developed where age is identified as merely one of the factors in determining the competence of giving the consent. And this approach should also include psychological competence.
For example- if a child of 17 years is in a relationship with a 19-year-old. And they have sexual intercourse with the consent of each other and while giving consent, the minor is well aware of its pros and cons. Then, this will be termed as an informed consent, and the other person should not be punished just because of the age of the minor. So by following this approach, the harassment will be curbed, and the POCSO act will also fulfill its purpose, which is to protect the child from sexual abuse.
What can we conclude from this?
We can conclude that the central aim of the Protection of Children from sexual offences Act,2012 (POCSO), is to protect children from sexual abuse, but now this act has evolved many loopholes including the fixed age rule under this law which criminalizes any sexual intercourse with or without consent of the minor. There is no room for consent relationship which limits sexual autonomy of children, and are now widely misused to punish young adults. This rule is also widely used by the relatives of the minor as a tool for harassment. Further, this has concluded that, how the fixed age rule has created a grey area, which has left a wide opened space for suggestions regarding judicial interpretations while dealing with the POCSO cases. Some of which are-
Initially, judges should adopt a valid interpretation of the POCSO Act when imposing punishment on all individuals found guilty under this law, irrespective of the minor’s consent. Secondly, over time, the judiciary must increasingly shift towards a purposive interpretation when determining the culpability of the accused under the Act.
Lastly the fixed age rule should be abolished, and the competence of the minor should be determined by the psychological competence of the child and by their free will, not just by age. Rather, age should just be one factor in order to determine the competence, not the only factor. By this approach, the act will serve its true objective and the minor will be able to assert their sexual autonomy with their free will.
References:
Case Laws
Ajay Kumar v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2022) 6 HCC (Del) 530.
Maruthupandi v. State (Madras), (2019) 4 HCC (Madras) 459.
Ranjit Rajbanshi v. State of W.B., Criminal Appeal No. 459 of 2018 (Calcutta HC).
R. Partiban v. State, Criminal Miscellaneous Petition Nos. 8645 and 8648 of 2022, dated on 7-7-2022 (Madras HC).
Journal Article
Prem Vinod Parwani, Revisiting Consent Under POCSO: From A ‘Fixed- Age’ to a ‘Competence- Based Standard, 16 NUJS L. Rev. 2 (2023).
Protection against misuse: on POCSO Act, adolescent sex, The Hindu (Dec. 20, 2025).
Disclaimer: This article is intended solely for educational and informational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy, reliability, and completeness of the information provided, ClearLaw.online, the author, and the publisher disclaim any liability for errors, omissions, or inadvertent inaccuracies. Readers are strongly advised to consult a qualified legal professional for guidance on any specific legal issue or matter.