Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

The Bombay High Court, while hearing the suo moto petition regarding the Badlapur sexual assault incident, said that instead of focusing on the victims, why are we not teaching our boys what is right and wrong.

 

"We always speak about girls. Why don't we tell boys what is right and wrong? We need to change the mindset of boys when they are young. Teach them to respect women," the court said.

The division bench, comprising Justice Revati Mohite Dere and Justice P.K. Chavan, took suo moto cognizance of the rape of two 4-year-old kindergarten students by a school cleaner.

The bench also stated that male chauvinism and toxicity still exist and emphasized the need for a change in mindset.

"Male dominance, male chauvinism, and male toxicity are still there. Until we teach our children at home about equality, nothing will happen. Till then, all these laws like Nirbhaya and all will not work," the court said.

Advocate General Birendra Saraf, appearing for the police, submitted that the state would ensure awareness measures are taken, including through social media and advertising in theaters.

The court also expressed its displeasure over the lack of availability of a female attendant to assist the minor whenever there is a nature's call.

The bench further inquired whether background checks and police verification, as mandated under the Act, were conducted by the school authorities.

The Advocate General responded, stating that he would need to take instructions. He informed the court that the accused had been married three times and that even his parents were working in the same school.

The bench also emphasized the need for a separate department to process all Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) reports in cases of rape and POCSO, noting that delays in these reports adversely affect the trial.

Furthermore, the high court observed that there was a violation of the mandate under the Act, as the class teacher failed to report the case to the police and instead reported it to the higher authorities of the school.

The bench questioned the Advocate General (AG) whether Section 16 of the POCSO Act was invoked against the teacher for her illegal omission and failure to comply with her duty. 

The AG responded, stating that the Special Investigation Team (SIT) is still investigating the matter, and all necessary actions would be taken if any evidence is found.

The court further suggested setting up a committee comprising a retired judge, a retired police officer, a retired principal, a woman IPS officer, and a member of the Child Welfare Committee to examine guidelines for safety of children in schools

The bench will now hear the case on September 3.