A young man from Perambalur was charged under Sections 5(1), 5(j)(ii), and 6 of the POCSO Act<\/strong> following the pregnancy of a 17-year-old girl he was dating. Following the FIR, the couple got married, both families approved of their relationship, and a joint compromise memo was submitted in an attempt to have the case dropped. The man claimed that the case was consensual, that the parties were now married, and that the prosecution would only ruin his life, so he moved the High Court to stop the proceedings under Section 528 BNSS \/ 482 CrPC.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Court\u2019s Observations<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Referring to this matter,Justice Kumar recalled that many POCSO prosecutions involve teenagers who \u201cfall victim to the application of the POCSO Act at a young age without understanding the implication of the severity of the enactment.\u201d<\/em><\/strong> He reiterated that relationships between adolescents often stem from \u201cmutual innocence and biological attraction\u201d and cannot be treated as criminal acts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Quoting the earlier ruling, the Court observed that the definition of \u201cchild\u201d under Section 2(d) should be reconsidered, suggesting that consensual relationships after age 16 should be excluded from the Act\u2019s harsh provisions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cAny consensual act after the age of 16 can be excluded from the rigorous provisions of the POCSO Act and tried under more liberal laws,\u201d the judgment said.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n Justice Kumar made a logical observation:<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cAfter the complaint being lodged, the police register FIRs for such offences; invariably the boy gets arrested and thereafter, his youthful life comes to a grinding halt.\u201d<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n He held that such prosecutions serve no societal purpose and that keeping them pending only prolongs mental agony for both families.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Final Order:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The High Court quashed the FIR on the file of the All Women Police Station, Perambalur, and accepted the Joint Compromise Memo dated 09 October 2025 as part of the record. \u201cWhen two young persons have married and are raising a child, continuing POCSO prosecution serves no public purpose<\/em><\/strong>,\u201d Justice Kumar declared.The Criminal Original Petition No. 27976 of 2025 was accordingly allowed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Justice N. Sathish Kumar\u2019s order goes beyond one case, it shines a national light on a silent tragedy: how young men across India are being branded as sexual offenders for nothing more than consensual teenage love.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The judgment is a wake-up call for lawmakers, parents, police, and the judiciary. The Court recognised that hundreds of boys are dragged into POCSO prosecutions where both parties are emotionally immature, in love, and often end up marrying later. Yet, the boy alone faces arrest, social stigma, and a destroyed future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cAfter the complaint being lodged, invariably the boy gets arrested and thereafter, his youthful life comes to a grinding halt.\u201d \u2014 Justice N. Sathish Kumar, Madras High Court<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n The judge\u2019s words deliver a powerful message that justice must be humane. Laws meant to protect children cannot become instruments that criminalise adolescence or punish affection. The ruling calls upon Parliament to redefine the term \u201cchild\u201d under Section 2(d) of the POCSO Act, proposing that consensual acts after age 16 should not be prosecuted under the same provisions that punish predatory abuse.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This interpretation carries four vital legal and social messages:<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n
\n
Justice N. Sathish Kumar\u2019s Message to Legal Reform POCSO<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
\n
![\"Madras](\"https:\/\/www.shoneekapoor.com\/legal-news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Madras-High-Court-1024x576.webp\" "\\"\\"")