Revisiting Adolescent Consent Under Pocso: Evaluating the Need of Romeo-Juliet Clause

Child protection is a fundamental priority within modern criminal jurisprudence. The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO) was enacted as a robust child protection statute to combat exploitation and sexual abuse of minors. It defines child as person below 18 years, promoting debate on age of consent. The rigid framework of the law creates constitutional paradox by criminalizing consensual intimacy among adolescence; a stage associated with increasing biological maturation and cognitive awareness of sexuality. The POCSO Act made no distinction between consensual relationships, like those in Romeo-Juliet cases, and instances where the victim experienced actual abuse or violence.In India, absence of "Romeo-Juliet" Clause create space for familial epicaricacy, where the law is weaponized to settle personal vendetta. A narrowly crafted exception would safeguard adolescent intimacy without diluting penalties for coercion or abuse.This paper explores significance of introducing close-in-age exemption within the POCSO framework, which include slashing vexatious F.I.R., protecting constitutional rights under Articles 14 and 21 for peers age of 16-18 years with 2-3 years gap, align Indian law with International Standards and Practices, curbs "score settling". scale down mechanical imprisonment, truncate burden on courts, compliment other laws (example Juvenile Justice Act 2015). The study examines POCSO provision, key judicial development including State of UP vs Anurudh (2026), the age of consent, the Mature Minor Doctrine, comparative cross jurisdictional perspective. Ultimately, the article underscores the imperative to reconcile legal intent with social realities, ensuring that the protecting mandate of the Act is not subverted into injustice.