NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India on Tuesday made a significant oral observation regarding the "increasing misuse" of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act in cases stemming from marital disputes and consensual relationships between adolescents.
The Bench, comprising Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice R. Mahadevan, stressed the urgent need to spread legal awareness among boys and men about the stringent penal consequences of sexual offences to prevent such misuse.
The observation came during the hearing of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by Senior Advocate Aabad Harshad Ponda, which seeks directions from the Court to promote public sensitisation regarding the laws governing sexual offences and the POCSO Act.
The Court's Observation
During the hearing on November 4, 2025, the Bench took note of an emerging trend where the provisions of the POCSO Act, a law designed to protect children, are being invoked in contexts seemingly outside its intended scope.
"One thing we would like to remark," the Bench stated, "The POCSO Act is being misused in cases of marital discords and matters pertaining to consensual relationships between adolescents. We should spread awareness in boys and men about the legal provisions."
The Court has adjourned the matter to December 2, 2025, after noting that several States and Union Territories have not yet filed their responses to the petition.
The PIL, titled Aabad Harshad Ponda v. Union of India & Ors., had previously seen the Court issue notices to the Union government, the Ministry of Education, the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting, and the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) back in August.
The PIL: Preventive Education Over Punitive Action
Senior Advocate Aabad Harshad Ponda, arguing in person, centered his petition on the critical need for "systemic reforms in education" as a preventive mechanism to curb crimes, particularly those against women.
The PIL argues that punitive action after a crime has been committed is insufficient. Instead, it posits that "preventive steps through education and awareness are the need of the hour."
Mr. Ponda highlighted a significant "disconnect between the legislature's intent and the public's awareness of the law." He contended that robust public education on laws relating to rape and the significant amendments made following the 2012 Nirbhaya case could not only prevent the misuse of these laws but also foster genuine respect for women's rights.
"The challenge is not merely punishing offenders," the petition states, "but ensuring that such crimes are not committed in the first place." To achieve this, the PIL argues that laws must be made "accessible and understandable to the public, especially the youth."
Dangers of 'Knee-Jerk Reactions'
The petition also takes a critical stance on the legislative response to rising crime rates. It notes that despite rape laws being made "more stringent post-Nirbhaya, this crime only seems to be on the rise."
Mr. Ponda’s PIL warns against a "knee-jerk reaction" of merely increasing punishments. It raises serious constitutional concerns over recent legislative moves in states like Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, and West Bengal, which seek to introduce mandatory death penalties for rape-cum-murder cases.
The petition specifically refers to the landmark Supreme Court ruling in Mithu v. State of Punjab (1983), which had previously held that mandatory death penalties are unconstitutional as they violate fundamental rights.
Furthermore, the PIL cautions against the misuse of these stringent provisions, citing the inherent risks of "false accusations" and the "denial of due process," including the denial of anticipatory bail. True justice, the petition argues, "must be tempered with fairness."
A Call for Moral Education in Schools
The PIL’s emphasis on education finds resonance with the Supreme Court's own recent observations. The provided text notes that on May 6, the Court had proposed the introduction of two weekly periods dedicated to "moral education and citizenship values" in all government and private schools across the country.
Justice Nagarathna, who is also on the current Bench, had observed at the time, “Why can’t there be two classes in a week for this subject in all government and private aided and unaided schools in the country? It will help the children.”
She had further remarked on the potential for children to become agents of change within their own families, noting, “The children can even educate their parents about it, if they are interested in school.”
Seeking this broader societal reform, Mr. Ponda's petition calls for the specific inclusion of moral education and gender sensitivity in school curriculums. It advocates for gender equality training to begin early, "particularly among boys," to fundamentally change attitudes that normalize or tolerate violence against women.
The case will be heard next on December 2, 2025, pending responses from the concerned States and Union Territories.