Allahabad High Court Seeks POCSO Law Review, Suggests Community Service in Exceptional Cases

PRAYAGRAJ: The Allahabad High Court has called for a review of the legal framework governing exceptional cases involving young couples under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, suggesting that courts should have greater sentencing flexibility where the circumstances warrant a more nuanced approach.

In its October 5 judgment, a division bench of Justice Atul Sreedharan and Justice Achal Sachdev asked the Law Commission to consider recommending suitable amendments to the legislation.

The court said the review should take account of India’s social conditions, particularly situations in which poverty, limited education and a lack of awareness about the law may complicate cases involving underage relationships.

The bench also raised the possibility of alternative penalties, including community service, in exceptional circumstances.

It observed that the strict application of the law could, in some cases, cause hardship to a family formed through a relationship that has resulted in the birth of a child.

The court stressed that such a review should not undermine the objective of protecting children. Rather, it said, the legal system should examine whether carefully defined discretion could prevent unintended injustice in unusual cases.

Court allows plea involving young couple and infant

The observations came while the court was considering a habeas corpus petition filed by Rakesh Yadav and another petitioner. The bench allowed the plea and permitted the woman to live with the man she had eloped with and married.

According to the judgment, an ossification test estimated the woman’s age at approximately 18 years.

The couple also had a two-month-old child. These circumstances formed part of the background against which the court considered the petition.

The bench said the Law Commission could examine whether Special Judges should be given appropriate discretion to determine punishment in exceptional cases after considering the specific facts and circumstances. Community service and other alternative forms of punishment were among the options it suggested for examination.

The court cautioned that the principle that ignorance of the law is no excuse should not be applied mechanically without considering the factual context. It noted that the consequences of strict enforcement could, in certain situations, run counter to the broader objective of achieving justice.

Illiteracy and poverty highlighted as social concerns

During its interaction with the woman and her father, the bench learned that she had studied only up to Class V. She told the court that she could not read a newspaper and was able to write only her name.

The judges referred to this exchange while discussing the challenges faced by people who have limited access to education and may not understand their legal rights, obligations or the consequences of their actions.

The court observed that lawmakers may not have sufficiently accounted for these social realities when framing the legislation.

The bench acknowledged that ignorance of the law does not ordinarily provide a defence. However, it said that applying this principle in an entirely rigid manner could lead to outcomes that appear unjust in particular factual circumstances.

It therefore asked the Law Commission to study the issue and consider whether amendments could provide a more proportionate response in exceptional cases involving young couples, without weakening the protective purpose of the POCSO Act.

Court raises questions over school education.

The judgment also expressed concern about the woman’s limited educational attainment. The bench questioned why she had left school after Class V and why the state education system had failed to ensure that she continued her studies.

Describing the quality of school education as a serious concern, the court said children should remain engaged in education until they reach adulthood. It also stressed the need to provide opportunities for vocational training so that young people can develop skills and become economically self-reliant.

The judges observed that adolescence can involve physical and emotional changes that influence young people’s relationships.

But they underlined the responsibility of the state to ensure that minors receive education, guidance and opportunities for personal development.

The court’s observations point to a broader policy question: how the law can continue to safeguard children while addressing exceptional circumstances in which strict legal consequences may affect an existing family, including a child born from the relationship.

The proposed changes remain recommendations for consideration by the Law Commission. Any amendment to the POCSO Act would require the appropriate legislative process, and the court’s observations do not, by themselves, change the law.