The Supreme Court on Tuesday underlined the need to distinguish between rape and genuine romantic cases involving youngsters on the verge of majority.
A bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and R Mahadevan noted the existence of co-education institutions and universities and said, "Now, they develop feelings for each other. Can you say it is criminal to love? We have to keep a distinction between a criminal act like rape, etc., from this."
The observations came on a petition raising the question whether or not the age of consent, which is 18 years, should be reduced to 16 under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.
"When there are genuine romantic cases, they like each other and they want to get married... Don't treat such cases the same as criminal cases," the bench said.
The bench went on, "You have to keep the reality of society in mind."
The top court referred to the trauma such couples face, generally owing to the male partner being sent to jail by the parents of the girl after filing a case under the POCSO Act.
"This is the harsh reality in society," the bench said, noting cases under the POCSO Act were also filed to cover up elopements.
{{/usCountry}}"This is the harsh reality in society," the bench said, noting cases under the POCSO Act were also filed to cover up elopements.
{{/usCountry}}Senior advocate H S Phoolka, appearing for the petitioner organisation, called for safeguards.
The bench observed that the police would look into the matters to ascertain whether it was a case of kidnapping, trafficking or whether it was a case of genuine love.
Phoolka said a similar issue concerning the age of consent was being considered by another bench of the apex court.
The bench posted the matter for August 26 after Phoolka said he would place on record some top court orders in the context of the prayers sought for in the petition.
Recently, the Centre defended in the apex court the statutory age of consent of 18 years, saying the decision was a "deliberate, well-considered, and coherent" policy choice aimed at shielding minors from sexual exploitation.
The Centre said diluting the age of consent or introducing exceptions under the guise of adolescent romance would be not only legally unsound but also dangerous.
The written submissions was filed in a separate case which raises the point of age in adolescent relationships.