Allahabad High Court asks Law Commission to review POCSO Act for minor couples

The Allahabad High Court has asked the Law Commission of India to recommend amendments to the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, to give trial judges discretion in exceptional cases involving adolescent couples.

A division bench comprising Justice Atul Sreedharan and Justice Achal Sachdev observed that applying the criminal statute without regard to India's social realities can sometimes "advance injustice rather than justice", particularly when young couples have had a child together.

What the court recommended to the Law Commission

The bench suggested that lawmakers consider giving special judges adequate statutory leeway to evaluate individual circumstances before deciding sentences in adolescent cases.

Among the proposed reforms, the judges asked the Law Commission to examine alternative penalties, including community service, so that young families formed out of ignorance of statutory provisions are not broken up unnecessarily.

While affirming that ignorance of the law cannot serve as a blanket defence, the court said that applying the principle pedantically risks severe hardship for vulnerable citizens who may lack formal legal awareness.

The case before the Allahabad High Court

The observations came as the high court allowed a habeas corpus petition filed by Rakesh Yadav, who sought the production and release of his wife.

According to court records, the couple eloped and signed an affidavit on 1 September 2025 declaring themselves husband and wife. The state administration and the woman's father maintained that her date of birth was 25 July 2010. Following the elopement, a POCSO case was filed against Yadav, and the girl was placed in a state-run Balika Griha, where she gave birth to a child.

The court observed that the record contained no birth certificate issued by a municipality, panchayat, or school authority to conclusively verify her age. It also recorded that while the young woman had attended school up to Class 5, she could only write her signature and was unable to read a newspaper, while her father had never received any formal schooling.

Strengthening youth welfare and education

Balancing legal enforcement with welfare needs, the bench pointed out that adolescents around 15 years old naturally experience emotional and physical development that can lead to mutual attraction.

At the same time, the judges highlighted the state's constructive duty to safeguard youth development. The bench emphasised that public authorities must ensure minors remain actively engaged in formal schooling until they reach the age of majority, backed by robust access to vocational skills training so young citizens can build secure, self-reliant futures as India's legal and developmental frameworks continue to evolve.