"Parochial & Myopic Mindset" : Karnataka HC Refuses To Quash FIR Against Teachers For Threatening School Girl With A Private Video
|The Karnataka High Court refused to quash an FIR against two school teachers who threatened a minor girl with a video of her kissing a boy from school, which led her to commit suicide.
The incident that shocked the conscience of the Court involved a high school girl who committed suicide after consuming rat poison in her school after being repeatedly publicly harassed and threatened by her drawing and physical training teachers in the name of discipline.
A Single Bench of Justice M. Nagaprasanna observed, “All these problems sprung, in the considered view of the Court, due to parochial and myopic mind set of the petitioners. The petitioners have projected that girl talking with another boy, is indiscipline and have harassed and threatened the victim. The victim who is of an adolescent age was unable to bear as to what would be the consequence. Therefore being a girl child and the men i.e., the petitioners threatening the girl child dragged the victim to depression.”
Advocate Ashwin Joyston Kutinha represented the petitioners, while Addl. SPP B.N. Jagadeesh appeared for the respondents.
The male teachers were accused under IPC Sections 305 (abetment of suicide of a child), 506 (criminal intimidation), 354(D) (stalking), 509 (insulting the modesty of a woman), Section 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, and Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act (JJ Act).
After the issue was brought to the attention of the victim’s mother, she asked the teachers to address any problems directly with her, rather than humiliating her daughter publicly. However, the minor succumbed to the harassment and consumed rat poison.
The Court pointed out that the “pseudo indiscipline” projected by the teachers was that the victim was talking to another boy. “It is highly ununderstandable as to what indiscipline that would be, if the girl talks with another boy. It can by no means be a taboo or indiscipline in any institution,” the Bench added.
“It is unpardonable for the teachers to behave in the manner that they have behaved in the case at hand towards an adolescent girl. Threatening an adolescent girl that they would circulate some video or harassing a girl that her marks is low because she is indulging in talking with a boy, are all acts which would impact the psyche of a girl, which has led to the most unfortunate event,” the Court remarked.
“If only the teachers had dealt with the child in a manner appropriate, precious life of the child would not have been lost. The contents of the complaint and the statement, if read, the acts of the petitioners are unpardonable,” the Court stated.
Consequently, the Bench held, “The pedagogues cannot blissfully ignore taking note of human psychology, particularly of that of a child or an adolescent, during their pedagogy and try to enforce strict discipline in a wooden manner, or a lifeless manner.”
Accordingly, the High Court rejected the criminal petition.
Cause Title: Roopesha & Anr. v. The State & Anr.