To bring home charges u/S 7&11 POCSO Act, offender must have “sexual intention": Gujarat HC

The Gujarat High Court recently set aside the proceedings initiated under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act) against a school principal, teacher, and others who had been accused by a student's mother of committing ‘sexual assault' upon her daughter.

Justice Niral Mehta rejected the allegations levelled by the mother that teachers and the principal of the school in Surat’s Laldarwaja committed sexual assault on her daughter by slapping her, using foul language and threatening to leak a video of her adjusting her skirt to other students and parents.

The judge said, "...to bring home the charges under Sections 7 and 11 of the POCSO Act, 'sexual intention' is the foremost ingredient. In both the sections, the offender must have a 'sexual intention’ and the offence should have been committed in furtherance of such 'sexual intention'."

Stressing that in both the sections, the legislature has laid much emphasis on the “sexual intention” of the offender, the judge opined that in the present case, though the accused acted harshly and disproportionately, but, certainly, it could not be said that their actions fell within the four corners of the provisions of the POCSO Act.

"If we consider the complaint, there is no allegation whatsoever in nature against the present petitioners that they have extended misappropriate / bad touch to the victim. Its plain reading would prima facie, suggest that the management of the school have extended harsh treatment to the child under the guise of disciplinary issues," the court highlighted. 

The school teachers and the principal had moved the high court seeking direction to quash the proceedings initiated against them under Sections 323, 354(b) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 7(Sexual assault), 8 and 11(Sexual harassment) of the POCSO Act.

However, the counsel for the petitioners did not press petitioners’ petition so far as the offence punishable under Sections 323, 354(b) and 114 of the IPC were concerned, and apprised the court that petitioners’ sole grievance was against the invocation of the provisions under the POCSO Act.

He submitted that the concerned girl student often resorted to misbehaviour in classrooms and as a disciplinary action, she was punished. He also asserted that the student's parents kept filing false cases against the school management for some or other reason.

However, the counsel for the parents of the girl student argued that allegations made against the petitioners were very serious in nature, and thereby, quashing of the complaint, at the present stage, without leading any evidence, would not have been justifiable.

Court, however, noted that even if the entire complaint was taken as it is, in that event also, there was no allegation against the petitioners with regard to “sexual intention”.

Therefore, stating that the basic ingredient i.e. “sexual intention” was completely missing from the entire complaint, Court held that in absence of any such factual allegation, it would be highly prejudiced for the petitioners to undergo and face trial for the offence punishable under the provisions of the POCSO Act. 

Therefore, Court partly allowed the petition and quashed the criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioners qua the offence punishable under the provisions of the POCSO Act.

Case Title: Sujata Suraj Bhatia v. State of Gujarat