Supreme Court Calls for ‘Romeo–Juliet’ Clause in POCSO Act to Protect Consensual Adolescent Relationships

Top court flags misuse of child protection law, urges Union government to consider legislative safeguards while setting aside sweeping High Court directions

Yash Mittal, LiveLaw, New Delhi, January 10, 2026: In a significant development, the Supreme Court has suggested that the Union Government consider introducing a “Romeo–Juliet” clause in the POCSO Act to exempt adolescents who engage in consensual relationships from criminal prosecution, despite being below the age of consent (18 years) and having only a minor age difference.

“Considering the fact that repeated judicial notice has been taken of the misuse of these laws, let a copy of this judgment be circulated to the Secretary, Law, Government of India, to consider initiation of steps as may be possible to curb this menace, inter alia, the introduction of a Romeo–Juliet clause exempting genuine adolescent relationships from the stronghold of this law; enacting a mechanism enabling the prosecution of those persons who, by the use of these laws, seek to settle scores, etc.”, ordered a Bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and N. Kotiswar Singh, as a post-script in a judgment delivered in a matter arising out of an Allahabad High Court decision which, while granting bail to the juvenile, had issued sweeping directions to investigative agencies to conduct medical tests, such as ossification tests, at the very outset of the investigation to determine the age of victims.

Setting aside the High Court’s sweeping directions, the top court found them to be against the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, which prescribes a mandatory procedure under Section 94 to determine the age of the victim.

The provision states that age is to be determined first on the basis of a matriculation or equivalent certificate, failing which a birth certificate issued by a municipal authority or panchayat is to be relied upon.

Only in the absence of these documents can medical tests, such as ossification tests, be ordered.

Not interfering with the High Court’s findings on the grant of bail, the judgment authored by Justice Karol, however, in a significant post-script to the judgment, acknowledged the growing misuse of the POCSO Act in cases where the relationship is romantic and consensual, but one of the parties is technically a minor.

The Bench observed that such prosecutions often criminalise youthful relationships and result in severe consequences not only for the accused but also for the victim and their families.

A “Romeo–Juliet” clause, widely recognised in several jurisdictions, provides an exception to statutory rape laws where the age difference between the parties is minimal and the relationship is consensual.

The purpose is to prevent harsh penal consequences in cases where two adolescents are close in age and willingly engaged in a relationship, distinguishing such situations from exploitative or abusive conduct.

Thus, the Court directed that a copy of its judgment be forwarded to the Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India, suggesting that the legislature consider introducing safeguards of this nature.

The Court also recommended evolving a mechanism to penalise those who deliberately misuse POCSO provisions to settle personal scores or exert social pressure.