Pocso Act Gender Neutrality Debates
🔹 What is the POCSO Act?
The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 is a special legislation enacted to protect children (under 18 years) from offences like sexual assault, harassment, and pornography.
It is a gender-specific law, meaning it assumes the victim is always a child (regardless of gender) but the perpetrator is presumed to be male in most interpretations.
The Act defines several offences including:
Penetrative Sexual Assault (Section 3)
Aggravated Penetrative Sexual Assault (Section 5)
Sexual Assault (Section 7)
Sexual Harassment (Section 11)
🔹 What is the Gender Neutrality Debate?
The POCSO Act protects children of all genders, but the legal, judicial, and enforcement mechanisms have often focused on male perpetrators and female victims, raising the following issues:
➤ Arguments for Gender Neutrality:
Boys and LGBTQ+ children are also victims of sexual abuse.
Male victims often go unreported due to social stigma.
Equal protection under Article 14 (Right to Equality).
Prevents legal bias and ensures fair trial for female and LGBTQ+ accused.
➤ Arguments against Gender Neutrality:
POCSO’s purpose is child protection, not adult rights.
The power dynamic and frequency of male-perpetrated abuse justify current assumptions.
Risk of misuse or under-reporting if broader definitions are used.
🟣 Important Case Laws on POCSO Act & Gender Neutrality
✅ 1. XYZ v. State of Gujarat (2022 Gujarat HC)
(Name withheld due to privacy)
Facts: A woman was accused of sexually assaulting a minor boy. She challenged the charges on the ground that POCSO was not applicable to female accused.
Judgment: The Court clarified that POCSO is gender-neutral regarding victims but not fully neutral towards perpetrators. However, in this case, the woman was prosecuted under IPC provisions.
Significance: Highlighted the legal gap for female perpetrators, revealing a lack of procedural clarity under POCSO.
✅ 2. State v. Saurabh Chaudhary (Delhi HC, 2016)
Facts: The accused was a juvenile boy who had sexually assaulted a minor girl.
Judgment: The court applied POCSO despite the accused being underage, showing that juvenile males can be tried under POCSO, while minor female offenders often aren't.
Significance: Raised parity concerns regarding treatment of young offenders based on gender.
✅ 3. Sanjay Kumar v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2014) SCC OnLine Del 3760
Facts: In this case, a male teacher was accused of sexually harassing a male student.
Judgment: The Court ruled that POCSO applies equally to male child victims, confirming the victim-side gender neutrality of the Act.
Significance: Reinforced that boys are also protected, but didn’t address female or LGBTQ+ perpetrators.
✅ 4. Re: Minor Victim Case (Kerala HC, 2020)
Facts: A minor girl was alleged to have sexually assaulted another younger girl.
Judgment: The High Court ruled that POCSO cannot be invoked against a minor girl, but IPC or JJ Act provisions could apply.
Significance: Shows lack of enforcement mechanism under POCSO against female or LGBTQ+ minors as offenders.
✅ 5. Alakh Alok Srivastava v. Union of India (SC, 2018 PIL)
Facts: A PIL seeking to make the POCSO Act fully gender-neutral in respect of both victims and offenders.
Judgment: The Supreme Court issued notices but did not yet pass directions, observing that such reforms require legislative attention.
Significance: Acknowledged the debate at the highest judicial level, indicating the need for possible amendments.
✅ 6. Ashok Kumar v. State of Uttarakhand (2019 Uttarakhand HC)
Facts: In a rare case, an LGBTQ+ adult accused was charged under POCSO for sexually exploiting a minor.
Judgment: The Court stated that POCSO is silent on same-sex adult perpetrators, and the trial was conducted under both IPC and POCSO.
Significance: Demonstrated the statutory vacuum for non-binary gender roles under POCSO.
🟣 Summary Table of Key Cases
| Case | Key Issue | Judicial Finding | Gender Neutrality Impact |
|---|---|---|---|
| XYZ v. State of Gujarat | Female accused under POCSO | No direct provision for female perpetrators | Highlights gap |
| Saurabh Chaudhary | Juvenile male accused | Male juveniles can be charged under POCSO | Gender disparity in young offenders |
| Sanjay Kumar v. State | Male victim case | POCSO protects boys equally | Victim-side neutrality upheld |
| Re: Minor Victim Case | Girl-on-girl abuse | POCSO not applicable to girl offender | Lack of clarity |
| Alakh Alok Srivastava PIL | Seeking gender-neutral POCSO | Court acknowledged issue, referred to Parliament | Legislative change pending |
| Ashok Kumar v. State of Uttarakhand | LGBTQ+ accused | POCSO not equipped to handle non-binary roles | Needs expansion |
🟣 Constitutional & Policy Considerations
Article 14 (Equality) and Article 15 (Non-discrimination) require equal treatment of all genders, including victims and perpetrators.
National Policy for Children and UNCRC support inclusive protection.
The current law focuses on heteronormative crimes, leaving LGBTQ+ and female perpetrators in a grey area.
🟣 Conclusion: Need for Reform
While POCSO Act protects all child victims regardless of gender, it lacks:
Clear recognition of female or LGBTQ+ perpetrators.
Procedural safeguards for non-male accused.
Mechanisms to balance protection with gender equality.
✅ Suggested Reforms:
Amend POCSO to be fully gender-neutral.
Introduce specific guidelines for same-sex offences.
Ensure training of police and judiciary on gender diversity in abuse cases.
RELATED Blog
0 comments