Centre Tells Supreme Court: No Change in Age of Consent, 18 is Legally Non-Negotiable

In a matter that could significantly alter the legal landscape surrounding adolescent rights and sexual consent, the Supreme Court of India is currently hearing petitions urging a review of the age of consent, which is presently fixed at 18 under Indian law. The Centre has firmly opposed any move to lower this threshold, asserting that the current legal framework is essential for the protection of minors.

Responding to public interest litigations filed by child rights activists and legal experts, the Ministry of Women and Child Development submitted an affidavit reiterating that the age of consent for sexual activity must remain at 18 years. The Centre argued that this benchmark is aligned with constitutional protections, international treaties such as the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), and prevailing criminal statutes including the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The government expressed concern that reducing the age of consent, even marginally to 16, would open the door to misuse, complicate enforcement, and blur the line between consensual relationships and exploitation.

One of the key suggestions under consideration is the introduction of a close-in-age exception. This would prevent the prosecution of consensual sexual activity between adolescents who are close in age, typically between 16 and 18 years, under the POCSO Act. The Centre has opposed this legislative change, stating that such an exception would weaken child protection mechanisms and create legal ambiguities. It emphasized that a strict threshold of 18 ensures clarity in both enforcement and judicial interpretation. According to the affidavit, any legislative dilution through statutory exceptions would allow offenders to escape liability and pose challenges in proving coercion or lack of consent. The bright-line rule at 18 must remain inviolable.

Petitioners before the Court, including Senior Advocate Indira Jaising who is assisting the bench as amicus curiae, highlighted the increasing number of POCSO cases involving consensual relationships between teenagers. She pointed to government data indicating a sharp rise nearly 180 percent in POCSO cases involving adolescents aged 16 to 18 between 2017 and 2021. Jaising argued that many of these prosecutions are initiated by parents disapproving of inter-caste or inter-religious relationships and that the criminal justice system should not be weaponized against teenagers exercising autonomy. She urged the Court to consider the principle of evolving capacities of the child, enshrined in international law, which recognizes that adolescents gradually acquire the maturity to make independent decisions, including those related to sexuality and relationships. The current framework criminalizes teenage love, she stated, and often leads to the incarceration of young boys based on complaints filed by the girl’s family, even when the relationship is consensual.

While resisting statutory dilution, the Centre conceded that courts may use discretion when dealing with cases involving adolescents in consensual relationships. However, it insisted this discretion should remain a judicial prerogative and not be codified through legal amendments. It is open to the judiciary to consider the nature of each relationship and the context, the Centre said, but embedding exceptions in the statute will defeat the protective purpose of the law.

Case Title: Nipun Saxena Vs. Union of India