CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints Minimum Wages Cannot Be Ignored While Determining Just Compensation: Andhra Pradesh High Court Re-Fixes Income of Deceased Mason, Enhances Interest to 7.5% 34 IPC | Common Intention Is Inferred From Manner Of Attack, Weapons Carried And Concerted Conduct: Allahabad High Court Last Date of Section 4 Publication Is Crucial—Error in Date Cannot Depress Market Value: Bombay High Court Enhances Compensation in Beed Land Acquisition Appeals Order 26 Rule 10-A CPC | Rarest of Rare: When a Mother Denies Her Own Child: Rajasthan High Court Orders DNA Test to Decide Maternity Acquittal Is Not a Passport Back to Uniform: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Dismissal of Constable in NDPS Case Despite Trial Court Verdict Limitation Under Section 468 Cr.P.C. Cannot Be Ignored — But Section 473 Keeps the Door Open in the Interest of Justice: P&H HC Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness Employee Cannot Switch Cadre At His Sweet Will After Accepting Promotion: J&K High Court Rejects Claim For Retrospective Assistant Registrar Appointment Anticipatory Bail Cannot Expire With Charge-Sheet: Supreme Court Reiterates Liberty Is Not Bound by Procedural Milestones Order II Rule 2 Cannot Eclipse Amendment Power Under Order VI Rule 17: MP High Court Refuses to Stall Will-Based Title Suit Grounds of Arrest Must Be Personal, Not Formal – But Detailed Allegations Suffice: Kerala High Court Upholds Arrest in Sabarimala Gold Misappropriation Case Grounds of Arrest Are Not a Ritual – They Are a Constitutional Mandate Under Article 22(1): Allahabad High Court Sets Aside Arrest for Non-Supply of Written Grounds Sect. 25 NDPS | Mere Ownership Cannot Fasten NDPS Liability – ‘Knowingly Permits’ Must Be Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubt: MP High Court Section 308 CrPC | Revocation of Pardon Is Not Automatic on Prosecutor’s Certificate: Karnataka High Court Joint Family and Ancestral Property Are Alien to Mohammedan Law: Gujarat High Court Sets Aside Injunction Right to Health Cannot Wait for Endless Consultations: Supreme Court Pulls Up FSSAI Over Delay in Front-of-Pack Warning Labels If A Son Dies Intestate Leaving Wife And Children, The Mother Has No Share: Karnataka High Court

POCSO Act - Needs To Create Awareness In Schools: Kerala HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Kerala High Court raised pertinent concerns regarding the impact of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses Act (POCSO Act) on adolescents, specifically with regard to their nonconsensual sexual relationships [Anoop v. State of Kerala]. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas, while considering a bail application, brought up the specific issue of cases being filed against adolescents who, while in a relationship beyond platonic love, frequently unwittingly committed a POCSO Act-prohibited offence.

The Court observed that numerous adolescents engage in sexual relationships without regard for the severe consequences that the POCSO Act has in store for them.

The order stated, "A meaningful life could be practically extinguished by an immature or negligent act motivated by human curiosity or biological cravings, which psychologists consider natural."

The Court ruled that the State government and the education department must take the necessary measures, with the Court's assistance if necessary, to combat the alarming increase in the number of sexual offences involving schoolchildren.

"Young children, regardless of gender, engage in such behaviour oblivious to the dire consequences that await them. The amendments to the Indian Penal Code and the enactment of the POCSO Act stipulate extremely severe penalties for such offensive conduct "stated the Court in its order.

It opined that despite the fact that ignorance of the law is not an excuse, i.e., ignorantia juris non excusat, it is imperative to educate schoolchildren about the POCSO Act, as one of its purposes was to prevent sexual offences against minors.

"The curriculum must stipulate sessions/classes on the provisions of the POCSO Act and the amendments made to section 376 of the IPC. The state's educational system has grossly failed to educate young children about heinous crimes and their repercussions "the Judge ruled.

Justice Thomas observed that, unfortunately, the POCSO Act adheres to a conservative conception of rape, disregarding normal teenage emotions and desires.

"Unfortunately, the law makes no distinction between the traditional definition of rape and sexual interactions resulting from pure affection and biological changes. Statutes do not account for the biological curiosity of adolescents and classify all 'intrusions' into bodily autonomy, whether with or without consent, as rape for a certain age group of victims "the Judge remarked.

In accordance with Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Court impleaded the State Department of Education, the Central Board of Secondary Education, and the Kerala State Legal Services Authority suo moto in order to explore the possibilities of methods by which awareness can be raised.

On August 31, the matter will be heard again.

D.D: - 08 JUNE 2022

Anoop v/s State of Kerala

Latest Legal News