Rigid POCSO Act Can Produce “Injustice”: Allahabad HC Pushes for Sentencing Flexibility, Cites Poverty, Illiteracy

Questioning whether strict application of the POCSO Act can sometimes produce "injustice rather than justice", the Allahabad High Court recently highlighted the role of illiteracy, poverty and inadequate schooling in cases involving adolescents and called for the law to be considered against India's social realities.

A division bench of Justice Atul Sreedharan and Justice Achal Sachdev asked the Law Commission to examine possible amendments to the POCSO Act to give special judges greater sentencing discretion in exceptional cases, including consideration of alternatives such as community service.

The bench said such discretion was necessary "so that a family formed in circumstances arising from ignorance of the provisions of the POCSO Act is not unnecessarily disrupted in the very name of protecting girls and women below the age of 18 years".

Habeas Corpus plea

Court was dealing with a habeas corpus petition filed by a man seeking production of his wife. The man was an accused in a pending case under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, filed by his wife's father.

According to the petitioner's counsel, the petitioner and his wife, who was then his partner, had eloped and subsequently executed an affidavit dated September 1, 2025, describing themselves as husband and wife.

However, the State and the girl's father claimed that she was born on July 25, 2010, and was therefore still a minor. Court was informed that she had eloped with the peitioner, was subsequently recovered and sent to a Bal Griha, and later gave birth to a child, with the petitioner stated to be the father.

Court allowed the habeas corpus petition.

It noted that the girl had studied only up to Class V, and the only document before it regarding her date of birth was a transfer certificate issued when she left Class V. There was no school-issued date-of-birth certificate, and she had not appeared for matriculation. No birth certificate from a Corporation, Municipal Authority or Panchayat was also available.

An ossification test had instead assessed her age at approximately 18 years.

On the basis of the material produced before it, court held that the girl was a major and permitted her to leave with the petitioner, with whom she expressed a desire to live.

Illiteracy resulting in ignorance of POCSO law

While deciding the matter, court acknowledged that poverty and illiteracy may contribute to conduct that violates POCSO, but stressed that ignorance of law remains no defence.

Court noted that while interacting with the girl, it came to light that she could only write her name in Hindi and nothing else. She could not even read a Hindi newspaper.

It also noted that the girl's father was illiterate and had never attended school. He works as a labourer and earns approximately Rs.10,000 to Rs.12,000 per month. He has four children, while his aged parents also reside with him. He is the sole earning member of the family.

Court emphasised that in this case, the necessity of setting out the background of the girl and her family arose because the actions of the parties were required to be considered in the backdrop of the provisions of the POCSO Act, "the full and literal application of which may, in certain circumstances, have serious repercussions and consequences".

"Undoubtedly, ignorance of law is no excuse. However, if this principle is applied in a purely pedantic manner, the implementation of the POCSO Act may, in certain factual situations, result in consequences which may appear to advance injustice rather than justice," court stressed.

The division bench opined that it appeared that while enacting the legislation, sufficient regard was not given to the social realities prevailing in India, where a considerable section of the population remains illiterate or semi-literate and may not even be aware of the rights guaranteed to them under law and the Constitution, much less of the duties, obligations and legal consequences arising therefrom.

In the present case, court noted that the facts disclosed a situation where the natural course of human development appeared to have come into conflict with the rigours of law.

"It is natural for a child of about 15 years of age, upon attaining a certain degree of physical and emotional maturity, to experience attraction towards another person of the opposite gender," the bench noted.

It emphasised that "to expect such a child, particularly in the circumstances of the present case, to understand the legal liabilities and consequences arising from such conduct would require the State, in the first instance, to ensure that a minor remains meaningfully engaged in education until attaining the age of majority and is provided with adequate opportunities to acquire vocational skills and, ultimately, stand on her own feet".

Court cautioned that when the POCSO law is applied to a society where the literacy rate is low and the quality of the State education system is, to put it mildly, a matter of serious concern, such application could be unjustified.

"Questions inevitably arise as to why the prosecutrix attended school only up to Class V. Why was the State unable to ensure that she continued her education, or otherwise compel her to remain in school until she completed Class XII," the bench said.

Law Commission should examine POCSO sentencing

The bench noted that perhaps the issue had already been raised before the legislature, which is responsible for ensuring that appropriate changes are made in the law.

"Yet, the legislature appears to have remained consistently silent on the matter. Even earlier, the Law Commission had been apprised of the gross injustice that can result from the strict application of the provisions of the POCSO Act," court said.

Under these circumstances, court requested the Law Commission to examine the above-mentioned factors and facets in the context of Indian social realities and recommend suitable amendments to the POCSO Act for consideration by the legislature.

"The law must remain dynamic and capable of rendering complete justice having regard to the peculiar facts of each case," the bench emphasised.

The bench said that the trial court ought not to be placed in a situation where, for want of sentencing discretion, it is compelled to impose a stringent punishment upon a person who is presently the husband of the prosecutrix and the father of her child, merely because he had eloped with her before she attained majority.

Before parting with the matter, court clarified that the observations made in the order with regard to questions of fact were based purely upon the material available on record in the habeas corpus petition at hand.

It directed that such observations shall neither be taken into consideration by the trial court seized of the POCSO case nor be available to the defence.

The trial court trying the POCSO case shall adjudicate the matter strictly in accordance with law and solely on the basis of the evidence led and recorded in the said case, the bench ordered.

With the above directions, court disposed of the petition.

Case: Rakesh Yadav @ Pappu And Another v. State of U.P. And 4 Others

Order Date: October 5, 2026

Bench: Justice Atul Sreedharan and Justice Achal Sachdev