ROMEO-JULIET CLAUSE AND CONSTITUTIONAL AUTONOMY: AN ANALYSIS OF THE SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT IN INDIA

The "Romeo-Juliet clause" and the constitutional question of adolescent autonomy have emerged as pivotal issues in Indian legal discourse following the Supreme Court's milestone
ruling in State of Uttar Pradesh v. Anurudh (2026 INSC 47). This article provides a comprehensive constitutional analysis of that judgment, examining its handling of procedural questions, jurisdiction, age assessment under the POCSO Act, 2012, and its pointed recommendation to the Union Government regarding a close-in-age exemption for consensual
teenage relationships. The article traces the origins of the Romeo-Juliet clause from Shakespeare's ill-fated lovers to modern statutory exemptions worldwide. Examining India's
POCSO regime, it notes that approximately 25% to 49% of cases involve consenting adolescents close in age, with over four-fifths of complaints originating from parents reacting
to elopement, pregnancy, or breaches of caste and religious boundaries. Constitutionally, adolescents are protected under Articles 14, 15, 19, and 21 covering privacy rights (K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, 2017), equality, dignity, and decisional autonomy. Yet POCSO's blanket criminalization of all under-18 sexual activity potentially violates these rights through over-inclusion and disproportionate penalties. The article proposes a comprehensive legislative blueprint: set fourteen as the minimum age; cap partner differences at three years
for ages fourteen through seventeen; require genuine consent; bar exemptions where power imbalances exist due to authority or trust relationships; and include safeguards against malicious reporting. It examines comparative frameworks from the United States, Canada, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the Philippines, distilling common principles for an Indian context. Ultimately, this analysis argues that a narrowly crafted Romeo-Juliet clause would
align Indian child protection laws with constitutional commitments to dignity, privacy, equality, and proportionality, while maintaining robust safeguards against genuine exploitation.