Romeo-Juliet Clause under POCSO: Supreme Court’s Call to Protect Genuine Adolescent Relationships
THE VYNO LEGAL BULLETINS
D. Nandhini
2/7/20261 min read
"Romeo-Juliet Clause under POCSO: Supreme Court’s Call to Protect Genuine Adolescent Relationships"
The Supreme Court recognised that laws enacted to safeguard children, particularly the POCSO Act, are at times being misused or applied in a rigid and mechanical manner, especially in cases involving consensual relationships between adolescents. The Court observed that the issue cannot be resolved merely by issuing directions or amending statutes unless there is a deeper and more sensitive change in the manner in which the law is applied, guided by discipline, integrity, and empathy.
Taking judicial notice of several High Court decisions, the Supreme Court highlighted instances where the POCSO Act was misapplied, particularly in situations where criminal proceedings were initiated to settle personal disputes rather than to address genuine cases of sexual exploitation. In light of this recurring concern, the Court suggested that the Government of India should seriously consider introducing a “Romeo–Juliet clause”—a legal safeguard aimed at exempting genuine and consensual adolescent relationships from the stringent application of the POCSO Act.
The Court also stressed the need to evolve a mechanism to take action against individuals who misuse protective criminal laws for ulterior purposes, such as harassment or personal vendetta.
On the facts of the case, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal and set aside the directions issued in the impugned judgment. However, it clarified that bail already granted in similar cases would remain undisturbed, having regard to the individual circumstances considered by the courts concerned.
Importantly, the Court held that its ruling would operate only prospectively and would not adversely affect cases where bail had already been granted in accordance with earlier judicial directions. The Court further refrained from making any observations on cases listed in the appendices to the judgment, respecting their independent judicial assessment.
Lastly, the Supreme Court directed that a copy of the judgment be forwarded to the Secretary, Law, Government of India, as well as to the Allahabad High Court and the Trial Courts, to enable appropriate follow-up action in view of the concerns expressed.