New Delhi: Opposing the government’s firm, not to reduce the age of consent of less than 18 years, amicus Curia and Senior Advocate Indira Jaising told the Supreme Court that “he criminalized sexual activity between children in a group of 16–18 years of age, and violated his right to autonomy”.Presenting a counter for the center stand in the case, Jayasing said that the age of consent was stable in 16 years for 80 years and “Neither a rational reason was justified for 18 years and had no data and there was no data to suggest that the age of consent requires any increase”.“Until the POCSO Act was enacted, there was no law to deal with sexual offenses against children. In Section 63, the newly enacted Indian Naiya Code (BNS), 2023, has placed a legislative plan similar to the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 2013, which amended the IPC to increase the age of Kanent for 18 years,” she said.Jaising said that in the age group of 16–18, violating the right to autonomy of children in the age group of agreed, which could give mature consent to sexual activity, given the fact that they had received sexual awareness, as a result. However, he gave an important warning. “It is not a brief suggestion that anyone above 18 years of age has sex with below 18 years of age,” he said.“Scientific research indicates that teenagers are receiving puberty soon compared to many years ago and as we know that puberty is the age of awakening of sexual awareness. This is the age during which there is a natural attraction between the development of sexes and sexual relations,” Jessing said, “said,” to blame such an activity, “in -laws.,ZIzing requested SC to “declare that any consentful sexual activity among children aged 16–18 forms an exception to the punitive provisions of law in the form of ‘nearest’, anti-non-exploitation and non-exploitation.Hundreds of children have been branded as criminals in the age group of 16-18 due to aging aging, said, “Data also indicates that most of the complaints to the police are filed by the girl’s parents, often against their desires and against external reasons such as inter-religious relationships or inter-caste relationships.“It is not necessary in marriage as a result of consent sexual relations between teenagers in the age group of 16–18, but on the contrary, such sexual behavior will result in marriage as a result of criminalization of such sexual behavior to children to avoid PocSo to avoid prosecution to avoid alloping and marrying.” He suggested to the court that it stands as a law, when sexual activity occurs by consent, it needs to be read to include the ‘Close in Edge’ exception.
