POCSO

Hi! Thanks for the question! The POCSO Act while entailing Sexual Assaults against children talks about an act of 'immodesty' against a child. Herein, the matter is subjective and shall depend on how one perceives it. Also, the motive and intention of the person shall be considered before convicting an accused. The circumstances and facts of the case are also substantial. The incidences that you have mentioned cannot be very easily fitted in the 'Immodesty' bracket. The intention of the artists towards the children and the platform and occasion that it happened at play vital roles. 

Thus, it will totally depend on how the court perceives the whole episode and how well the persons defend themselves. 

The actress could not get away with the matter, being a female. The act is gender neutral in case of both, the accused and the victim. I hope my opinion gives you some clarity. 

Yes.     She gets.      Modesty is for females only.     Not for males.       Sex is committed by man only; not by woman.

If a man obtains consent of a woman under threat or intimidation, he commits rape.     If a woman has s*x putting the man under threat or intimidation, it's not rape;   she's not guilty either.

Who's responsible such for puerile laws?      Mostly men and of course legislators ( lawmakers ).