Centre opposes decreasing age of consent, cites danger of trafficking, abuse

The Union authorities has objected earlier than the Supreme Court to any transfer to cut back the age of consent beneath little one safety legal guidelines from 18 to 16 years, warning that such a change would open the floodgates to trafficking and different types of little one abuse beneath the garb of assent.

“Introducing a legislative close-in-age exception or lowering the age of consent would irrevocably dilute the statutory presumption of vulnerability that lies on the coronary heart of kid safety legislation,” the Centre, represented Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, clarified in written submissions positioned on report.

To buttress its argument, the Centre cited a 2007 Ministry of Women and Child Development research which discovered that 53.22% of youngsters reported going through a number of types of sexual abuse. It famous that in 50% of those circumstances, the abusers have been individuals in positions of belief or authority, together with mother and father, family, neighbours, and college employees.

“The report concluded that kids are significantly weak when the offender is a recognized determine, because the abuse is hid, normalised, or silenced via emotional manipulation or worry,” the Centre defined.

The Centre’s place is in distinction to that of senior advocate and amicus curiae Indira Jaising, who has argued earlier than the courtroom that consensual sexual exercise between adolescents aged 16 to 18 shouldn’t be labeled as “abuse” or criminalised beneath the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

Ms. Jaising urged the courtroom to learn a “close-in-age exception” into the legislation, which might apply to consensual sexual exercise the place each people are adolescents aged between 16 and 18. She submitted that the time period “little one” beneath Section 2(d) of the POCSO Act shouldn’t embrace adolescents on this age group engaged in consensual sexual relationships. Such an exception, she argued, would align with the protecting intent of POCSO whereas avoiding its misuse in circumstances involving non-exploitative adolescent relationships.

However, the Centre maintained that defining “little one” as an individual under 18 years was a “deliberate selection, grounded within the recognition that minors lack the authorized and developmental capability to present significant and knowledgeable consent in issues involving sexual exercise.”

“The choice to criminalise sexual acts with kids beneath 18 years displays a transparent understanding of the vulnerability of minors, the widespread prevalence of coercion and manipulation in such conditions, and the challenges in proving the absence of consent when minors are concerned… This legislative place embodies the collective will of Parliament, appearing in furtherance of its constitutional obligation to guard kids,” the Centre submitted.

“The legislative intent is additional bolstered by the age threshold adopted in different enactments, together with the Indian Majority Act, 1875, the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, and the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006… The authorized place is once more affirmed beneath Section 375 of the IPC and is retained beneath Section 63 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the place sexual activity with a lady under 18 years of age constitutes rape per se, no matter her purported willingness,” the Union authorities submitted.

The authorities mentioned the legislative framework on the age of consent beneath Indian legislation was rooted in a transparent and unambiguous intent to supply a “strong, non-negotiable defend” to minors towards sexual exploitation.

This intent flows from constitutional mandates beneath Articles 15(3) (particular provisions for girls and kids), 21 (proper to life) and 39(e)-(f) (safety of youngsters from abuse) and India’s worldwide obligations beneath the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.