More Coverage
Twitter Coverage
JOIN SATYAAGRAH SOCIAL MEDIA
"I seem to smell the stench of appeasement in the air": Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud urged parliament to revise the age of consent for sex under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, saying this provision poses difficulties for judges

Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud has urged the parliament to revise the age of consent for sex under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act), saying this provision poses difficulties for judges.
|
At present, the age of consent for sexual relationships is 18 years, and if an adult has sex with a minor even with the consent of the minor, it is considered rape.
Delivering the keynote address on a two-day national consultation on the POCSO Act organised by Supreme Court Committee on Juvenile Justice and UNICEF, CJI DY Chandrachud said that there is a growing concern around the age of consent under the Act, and it needs to be addressed.
He said this during a discussion on romantic relationships among minors. When adolescents engage in sexual activity with consent, such consent is not considered valid under POCSO, and legal actions are taken in such cases. The CJI said that when such cases reach courts, they pose difficulties for the judges, and therefore suggested that the minimum age of consent should be revisited by the parliament.
The CJI said, “You are aware that the POCSO Act criminalizes all sexual acts among those under 18 regardless of whether consent is present factually among the minors, because the presumption of the law is that there is no consent among those below 18. In my time as a judge, I have seen that this category of cases poses difficult questions for judges across the spectrum. There is a growing concern surrounding the issue which must be considered by the legislature in view of reliable research by experts in adolescent healthcare. I should leave this topic right here, as this topic is very vexed as we see in courts everyday.”
|
However, the CJI suggested that parliament amend the law to reduce the age of consent, instead of suggesting a judicial order to make the change in the law. Recently the central government has been vocal on the issue of the judiciary encroaching on the domain of parliament, and the CJI might have kept that in mind on the issue.
There seems to be a growing demand from the judiciary to amend the POCSO Act to reduce the age of consent for consent. The CJI’s comments came just days after Madras High Court recently said that it is ‘eagerly waiting’ for the legislature to reduce the age of consent under POCSO.
While upholding the conviction of a man accused of kidnapping and forcibly marrying a 17-year-old girl, Justice P Velmurugan of Madras High Court recently said that the court “eagerly is waiting for the amendment in the Legislature as expressed by my learned brothers.” However, the conviction was upheld by the court as the age of consent is still 18 years under the law.
The accused had contended that the relationship was consensual and that a 17-year-old can’t be considered a child. The court agreed that it is a grey area for teenagers in the age group of 16 to 18, and teenagers above 17 but below 18 may not be punished under POCSO. But the conviction was upheld by the court as the age of consent is still 18 years under the law.
The comments of the CJI and the Madras HC judge came after two different High Courts ruled that POCSO overrides Muslim personal law, and declared the marriage of minor Muslim girls invalid even though it is allowed under the personal law. In October, the Karnataka High Court said that while the marriage of Muslim girls after the age of 15 years is allowed as per Muslim Personal Law, having sex with such girls still violates the age of consent provision of POCSO. The High Court said that as POCSO is a special act, it overrides the Muslim Personal Law.
|
Last month, Kerala High Court delivered a similar verdict, saying that sex with minors is illegal under POCSO Act even if it is with a minor Muslim girl legally married. Justice Bechu Kurain Thomas said that if one of the partners in the marriage is a minor, offences under POCSO Act will apply, and the validity of the marriage would not be considered in such cases. The judge said that he can’t agree that an offence under the POCSO Act will not get attracted against a Muslim marrying a minor.
Like the Karnataka HC, the Kerala HC also said that although Muslims are allowed to marry minor girls under The Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, as the accused was arrested under POCSO, the special stature will prevail over the sharia law. Moreover, the court also said it is questionable whether the Muslim Personal Law overrides the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006. According to this act, the marriage of men below 21 years of age and women below 18 years of age is illegal.
References:
Support Us
Satyagraha was born from the heart of our land, with an undying aim to unveil the true essence of Bharat. It seeks to illuminate the hidden tales of our valiant freedom fighters and the rich chronicles that haven't yet sung their complete melody in the mainstream.
While platforms like NDTV and 'The Wire' effortlessly garner funds under the banner of safeguarding democracy, we at Satyagraha walk a different path. Our strength and resonance come from you. In this journey to weave a stronger Bharat, every little contribution amplifies our voice. Let's come together, contribute as you can, and champion the true spirit of our nation.
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
| ICICI Bank of Satyaagrah | Razorpay Bank of Satyaagrah | PayPal Bank of Satyaagrah - For International Payments |
If all above doesn't work, then try the LINK below:
Please share the article on other platforms
DISCLAIMER: The author is solely responsible for the views expressed in this article. The author carries the responsibility for citing and/or licensing of images utilized within the text. The website also frequently uses non-commercial images for representational purposes only in line with the article. We are not responsible for the authenticity of such images. If some images have a copyright issue, we request the person/entity to contact us at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. and we will take the necessary actions to resolve the issue.
Related Articles
- "चलो फिर से": Baba Ramdev claims "crores of people are dying" from toxic modern medicines, comparing their deadly impact to British rule, Islamic invasions, and revolutions by Lenin, Marx, and Mao, despite Supreme Court warnings against fearmongering
- Hours after Shivling discovered inside disputed Gyanvapi, AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi provokes Muslims against court-ordered proceedings amidst chants of ‘Naara-e-Takbeer’ and ‘Allahu Akbar
- Supreme Court steps in to decide whether Rohingyas are ‘refugees’ or ‘illegal immigrants’, raising critical concerns about whether the judiciary is once again overstepping its constitutional limits and assuming the role meant for the government
- In a major development, Mathura court allowed a plea to remove the disputed structure of the Shahi Idgah Mosque near Krishna Janmabhoomi for hearing: suit filed in the name of "Bhagwan Sri Krishna Virajman"
- Madras High Court: Do not take decision on melting Temple gold till Trustees are appointed
- "बाहर फेंको उठाकर": Jharkhand HC orders the removal of Bangladeshi intruders after revelations of ST girls being converted through marriage and madrasas' involvement, declaring a grave national issue that requires both state and central govt collaboration
- “The truth about injustice always sounds outrageous”: Supreme Court stays death sentence of M Samivel, who raped a minor girl and fearing that the girl might tell someone about the crime, he smashed her head against a tree and dropped her into a pond
- "We must distinguish between speaking to deceive and being silent to be reserved": After Delhi and Allahabad, Madhya Pradesh High Court also admitted PIL challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf Act, enacted by Congress Govt in 1995
- "Excessively harsh": Centre opposes criminalizing marital rape, citing existing laws like Sections 354, 354A, 354B, 498A IPC, and the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, already offer serious penal consequences for violations of consent within marriage
- "लताड़": Madras HC slams Tamil Nadu police for FIR errors in Anna University assault case, orders ₹25 lakh compensation, women-led SIT probe, victim’s fee waiver, action on FIR leak, and police lapses, ensuring privacy, dignity, and justice for the victim
- A fire, burnt cash, and a judge under suspicion—yet the Supreme Court refuses an FIR against Justice Yashwant Varma, asking petitioners to first write to the President and PM, shielding its own while justice quietly exits the courtroom, unheard and unseen
- Plea rejected by Allahabad High Court to open 22 'closed rooms' of Taj Mahal to research the real history, says "matter should be left to historians. Please don't take us to the historical facts which you believe"
- “Judgment does not necessarily relate to the judiciary system”: “There is a limit to criticizing judges. Give us a break” laments Justice Chandrachud, but in Nupur case emotions of judges were so extensive that it “diluted the beheading in Udaipur”
- "न्याय, मलाई मार के": In 1992, hundreds of Hindu girls were exploited in the Ajmer gangrape case by 'Khadims' of the Dargah and ex-Congressman Nafis Chisti, with the perpetrators only being convicted by the POCSO court after a long, grueling 32 years
- "Access is vital in lobbying. If you can't get in your door, you can't make your case": CJI Chandrachud removed justice MR Shah from the bench hearing forced conversion for not succumbing to lobby's pressure, was scheduled for Feb, now listed on Jan 16

























