XXX v. State of Kerala and Anr., 2025
The Court acknowledged that the objective of POCSO is to protect children from abuse, not to criminalize consensual relationships among peers.
Judgement Details
Court
Kerala High Court
Date of Decision
13 September 2025
Judges
Justice G. Girish
Citation
Acts / Provisions
Section 13(1)(ia), Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
Section 25, Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
Facts of the Case
-
The petitioner (18 years old) was in a romantic relationship with the victim, who was 17½ years old at the time of the alleged incident.
-
They were schoolmates, and the relationship had turned intimate on a few occasions, with full consent.
-
The petitioner was later booked under multiple sections of IPC and POCSO, treating the consensual relationship as sexual assault due to the victim being a minor under the POCSO Act.
-
The victim and her parents filed an affidavit stating they had no complaint against the petitioner and expressed a desire for the relationship to continue.
-
The petitioner approached the High Court under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of criminal proceedings.
Issues
-
Whether consensual intimacy between adolescents close in age, particularly where the alleged victim does not complain, warrants criminal prosecution under POCSO?
-
Whether the continuation of criminal proceedings would serve any meaningful purpose or unjustly affect the petitioner’s future?
Held
-
The Criminal proceedings were quashed in light of the following:
-
Full consent from the victim.
-
The relationship was romantic, not exploitative.
-
Both parties were close in age, and the incident was a result of adolescent immaturity, not criminality.
-
The future of both individuals would be negatively impacted by continuing the case.
-
Analysis
-
The decision demonstrates a progressive and empathetic interpretation of the POCSO Act, recognizing the reality of adolescent relationships.
-
The Court acknowledged that the objective of POCSO is to protect children from abuse, not to criminalize consensual relationships among peers.
-
It respects the agency of the victim, who is now an adult, and her right to choose her partner.
-
The judgment reinforces the need for judicial discretion and sensitivity in cases involving consensual adolescent relationships.