Delhi HC: Adolescent Love Not a Crime

The Delhi High Court has ruled that consensual romantic relationships between adolescents should not be criminalised in the absence of exploitation or abuse.

Justice Jasmeet Singh made the observation while dismissing a plea filed by the State challenging the acquittal of a young man booked under Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

The case dates back to December 2014, when the father of a 17-year-old girl filed a missing complaint after she did not return home from tuition. A young man from the same locality was also reported missing. The two were later found together in Dharuhera and brought back to Delhi.

The young man was charged under the POCSO Act on allegations of sexual relations with a minor. However, in February 2020, a Sessions Court acquitted him, noting that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the girl was under 18 at the time of the incident. The trial court also recorded that the relationship was consensual.

The State later approached the High Court seeking to overturn the acquittal.

While examining the matter, the High Court considered the girl’s statements made under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code and during trial. In her testimony, she said she had accompanied the accused voluntarily and that the relationship was consensual.

The Court observed that there was no evidence of force, coercion or inducement. Medical findings also did not support allegations of assault.

Justice Singh noted that the law must distinguish between exploitative conduct and consensual adolescent relationships. The judgment stated that criminal law should not be used to punish young individuals for forming emotional bonds, provided there is no element of abuse or control.

At the same time, the Court clarified that the protective intent of the POCSO Act remains strong. It emphasised that in cases where a child is clearly far below the age of majority — such as 14 or 15 years — strict enforcement of the law is necessary.

Another key issue in the case was age determination. The prosecution relied on school records indicating the girl’s date of birth. However, the High Court noted that these records were based on an affidavit by a relative and that the person concerned was not examined as a witness.

The Court said age verification must strictly follow Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice Act, which sets out a clear order of preference for documents used to establish age. It observed that a conviction under a stringent law like POCSO requires reliable and corroborated proof.

The judgment added that in borderline cases — where the age difference is minimal and the alleged victim consistently states that the relationship was voluntary — courts must take a balanced view.

After reviewing the evidence and applicable legal provisions, the High Court held that the trial court’s acquittal was justified. It concluded that the prosecution had not established beyond reasonable doubt that the girl was a minor or that the relationship was non-consensual.

The Court denied leave to appeal and upheld the acquittal of the accused in the case titled State vs Hitesh.

The ruling is likely to contribute to ongoing legal discussions on how courts interpret adolescent relationships under the POCSO framework, while maintaining safeguards against exploitation.