Read Time: 08 minutes

Synopsis

The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Friday dismissed a plea filed by the principal of Delhi Public School, Greater Faridabad seeking direction to quash the FIR lodged against her in a queer student's death case. 

The bench of Justice Harnaresh Singh Gill noted that the principal had knowledge about the alleged homophobic and transphobic bullying by the peers of the deceased child, and the inaction on her part in accordance with the POCSO Act, led to the child's suicide.

"Thus, the petitioner cannot plead excuses for not reporting the matter to the police for nearly five months," held the court. 

Court also refused to accept the argument that instead of going to the police, the principal had tried to handle the matter internally as she had her concerns regarding the safety and security of the students.

Court said, "The obligation on the part of the person, so receiving such information or having knowledge of such information, is not to investigate the matter himself or herself, but the mandate of the POCSO Act, is to report the matter to the Police. Thus, to argue that the endeavour on the part of the petitioner to settle the matter at her level, would obliterate her liability under the POCSO Act, is untenable".

The principal was seeking direction to quash FIR dated February 25, 2022 registered under Section 306 IPC and Sections 6, 18, 8, 21 of the Protection of the Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2022 (POCSO Act) and all consequential proceedings.

The FIR was lodged after a young student of Class X at the Delhi Public School, Greater Faridabad Sector-81, Faridabad, committed suicide on account of the alleged harassment, bullying, and torture by classmates/students of the school.

The allegation against the principal was that being the overall incharge of the school and having been intimated about the said harassment/bullying/mental torture, she did not act in the matter as per the mandate of the POCSO Act.

Seeking relief before the high court, the counsel for the principal argued that in the present case, no ingredients of Section 107 IPC were made out so as to attract the provisions of Section 306 IPC. 

Further, the counsel submitted that out of the 8 students allegedly involved in the bullying, four had already left the school and in their absence, the principal could not be tried under Section 21 of the POCSO Act which provides punishment for failure to report or record a case under Sections 19 and 20.

On the other hand, the counsel for the deceased child's mother submitted that she had sent an email to the principal on September 23, 2021 bringing to her notice the entire factual position including the sexual act(s), but nothing was done.

Had the principal acted on time taking into consideration the overall welfare of the children as stipulated under the POSCO Act, the young life could have been saved avoiding the never-ending trauma to the bereaved family, he submitted. 

Further, the amicus curiae in the case submitted that in terms of Section 19 of the POCSO Act, the principal ought to have acted swiftly and reported the matter to the police immediately.

The principal cannot wriggle out of her liability only for the reason that she had acted bona-fidely on her part, when specifically the mandate of the Act, stipulated a particular line of action, the amicus curiae argued. 

He placed reliance upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in The State of Maharashtra and another vs. Dr. Maroti s/o Kashinath Pimpalkar (2022).

Court found the plea and the argument as forwarded by the principal's counsel lacking merit, hence dismissed the petition. 

Case Title: Surjeet Khanna v. State of Haryana and another