Supreme Court's under-18 ruling triggers fresh debate on teen sexuality

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court's ruling that sex between a man and his wife under 18 years of age would be rape has triggered a fresh debate on how the government and courts will deal with social realities like consensual sex between adolescents.

Gender rights activists welcomed the judgment saying it may reduce instances of child marriages, but said the decision has come as a blow to individual's right to sexuality.

"The court's judgment fails to recognise an individual's right to sexuality. While it is true that 18 years is accepted as the age of consent, it is also true that adolescents exploring their sexuality should not be deemed criminals," said Rehana Adib, a woman's rights activist working with Astitva.

Some political activists were critical of the Centre batting for tradition.

CPM politburo member Brinda Karat said, "The judgment deals with one aspect of child marriage that is prevalent in India, where minor girls are forcibly married off to adult men. What is reprehensible and hypocritical is the approach of the Centre, which seems more committed to protect the institution of marriage rather than the interests of minors."

Karat said the court must consider the reality of consensual sex between youths. "If the girl is 16 and the boy around the same age, to treat such a relationship as statutory rape, and for the boy to be deemed a criminal and rapist is wrong. The court must take a different approach to such instances," she said.

Congress, too, questioned the government's position on women's rights before the SC. All India Mahila Congress chief Sushmita Dev, said, "In so far as this judgment says that age of consent must remain the same within and outside marriage, it is welcome. But the government's stand raises questions over whether the Modi government was merely posturing when it raked up women's rights in the triple talaq case, or if it only because it suited them to show Islam in a bad light."