Rajasthan High Court Sounds Alarm on Rising 'Romeo-Juliet' Cases in Jaipur
The Rajasthan High Court has voiced significant apprehension regarding what it termed the "recent growth" in prosecution of so-called "Romeo and Juliet" cases. These cases typically involve two adolescents or a couple where one partner is near legal age, engaged in a consensual relationship, often involving elopement, without any allegations of force, coercion, grooming, or sexual exploitation. Despite the consensual nature, the older partner frequently faces prosecution simply because one individual is under 18 years of age.
Court's Observations During Petition Hearing
While hearing a petition seeking the quashing of a First Information Report (FIR), a single bench presided over by Justice Anil Kumar Upman made a crucial observation. Justice Upman stated, "While making a note that the current case seems to be devoid of any sexual activity between the alleged victim and the accused, this court would also like to take into account the recent growth of these ‘Romeo and Juliet' cases, which emphasises a growing concern that the current legal framework fails to distinguish between predatory sexual exploitation and consensual adolescent relationships."
The court was specifically addressing a petition to quash an FIR related to offences under various sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and the subsequent trial before the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) court in Jaipur.
Arguments Presented and Case Details
The counsel representing the petitioner argued forcefully that there was no allegation of sexual relations—whether forced or consensual—at any stage of the proceedings. It was submitted that the girl had voluntarily left her home to be with the petitioner, who was stated to be approximately the same age. Furthermore, the counsel highlighted that the girl did not support the prosecution's case and was declared hostile during the trial proceedings.
After a thorough examination of the case records, the High Court found that the material evidence suggested the girl left her home of her own accord, travelled with the petitioner willingly, and raised no complaints against him. The court noted specific details: the girl was about 17 years old, the petitioner was about 19, they had studied in the same school, and she was pursuing a Bachelor of Science (BSc) degree.
Serious Concerns Over Legal Procedures
The court expressed serious concern over the "procedural trajectory" followed in this case, particularly the inclusion of aggravated penetrative sexual assault provisions under the POCSO Act. These provisions carry a minimum sentence of 20 years imprisonment. The court held that such a grave charge requires at least "grave suspicion" supported by some material evidence. However, the girl's statements contained a categorical denial of any sexual intercourse.
Additionally, the court noted that the medical examination conducted showed no evidence of sexual assault. "In these circumstances," the court remarked, it was incomprehensible how the investigating agency filed a chargesheet invoking stringent POCSO Act offences.
Court's Final Ruling and Implications
The Rajasthan High Court ultimately held that this was a fit case to quash the FIR and all proceedings arising from it before the trial court. The court stated that allowing such proceedings to continue would amount to an "abuse of the process of law." This ruling underscores the judiciary's growing unease with the application of stringent laws like POCSO in cases involving consensual adolescent relationships, where no element of exploitation or force is present.
The court's observations highlight a critical legal and social issue: the need for the legal framework to better differentiate between predatory sexual exploitation and consensual relationships among adolescents. This case from Jaipur serves as a significant precedent, urging law enforcement and judicial authorities to exercise greater discernment in prosecuting such sensitive matters.
