Login With Google
What Madras HC suggested on age of consent & age gap, and the implications
Why in news?
- Madras High Court made two significant suggestions while acquitting a young accused of sexual assault charges under the POCSO Act:(1) The age for the definition of a child be taken as 16 rather than 18.(2) The Act account for the difference in age between the offender and the girl involved in consensual sex.
More in news
- Court’s judgement:(1) The definition of ‘Child’ under Section 2(d) of the POCSO Act can be redefined as 16 instead of 18.(2) Any consensual sex after the age of 16 or bodily contact or allied acts can be excluded from the rigorous provisions of the POCSO Act and such sexual assault can be tried under more liberal provision.(3) This will help to distinguish the cases of teen age relationship after 16 years, from the cases of sexual assault on children below 16 years.(4) The Act can be amended to the effect that the age of the offender ought not to be more than five years or so than the consensual victim girl of 16 years or more.
- Demand for decriminalization of consensual sex:(1) A senior Supreme Court advocate called for decriminalization of consensual sex between those aged between 16 and 18.(2) This provision denies young person falling in this age bracket for consensual sex and subjects them to the control of families which motivated by caste, communal or orthodox and regressive views which leads to lodge false criminal complaints.(3) Various studies tell us in the age group between 16-18, there is a lot of experimental consensual sexual acts that take place.(4) In most of the cases, the parents of the girl lodge a complaint against the boy that it was non-consensual.(5) The issue of consent would have to be decided from the circumstances rather than putting the victim on the stand and asking her if she gave consent.(6) The judgement will help eliminate the unwarranted criminalization of consensual or romantic sexual relations.
- Way forward:(1) There can always be a discussion on what should be the age gap between alleged offender and victim.(2) Criminalizing the act just because there is age gap is a very Indian and patriarchal concept.(3) Law at present on this subject is very harsh and does not leave any scope for details and dynamics of a relationship to be considered by courts.(4) If an older man uses his power and position to exploit a younger woman it must be seen into the prism of power relationship and hierarchies, but the age difference should not be treated as crime.
Source
Indian express