The Himachal Pradesh High Court has refused to quash an FIR registered against a school teacher for offences against the POCSO Act, while observing that touches with sexual intent and comments about the attire of female students constitute an offence under Section 7 of the Act.

In that context, the Bench of Justice Rakesh Kainthla observed that, "The accused was a teacher of physics and had no concern with reproduction. Many girls stated that he used to touch the girls inappropriately on their back, cheek and neck. He used to comment about himself and the dress of the girls. These acts constitute the commission of an offence punishable under Section 7 of the POCSO Act, which provides punishment for physical contact with a minor with sexual intent."

In similar context, it was also noted that, "In the present case, the physical contact made by the accused with the girls coupled with the words uttered by him can only lead to one inference that the touch was with sexual intent."

The Principal of a Government Senior Secondary School in District Sirmour received a complaint about the sexual harassment of a girl. The case was referred to the Sexual Harassment Committee, but the girl and her parents did not appear before the Committee. Due to the seriousness of the allegation, the police were requested to take action. The police investigation revealed that 21 female students had issues with the accused's behavior.

Around 20 girls reported that the accused made inappropriate comments and touched them on their backs and cheeks, making them uncomfortable. Consequently, the accused was arrested, and the police filed a charge sheet for offenses under Section 354-A of the IPC and Section 10 of the POCSO Act.

The accused teacher sought to quash the FIR in the High Court, arguing that he had served the school for 22 years and received multiple awards. He claimed the sexual harassment was not mentioned in the initial complaint and that the principal wrongly referred the case to the Sexual Harassment Committee, which did not conduct an investigation. He also argued that even if the FIR's allegations were true, no offense was established. Therefore, he requested the FIR be quashed.

The AAG for the State countered that the police investigation confirmed the accused's sexual misconduct towards the female students, constituting an offense under Section 7 of the POCSO Act. Hence, he argued for the petition to be dismissed.

The High Court observed that, "The allegations made by the girls in their statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C. duly establish a prima facie commission of the offence punishable under Section 7 of the POCSO Act and the FIR cannot be ordered to be quashed at this stage".

Accordingly, the petition was dismissed.

Cause Title: Rakesh Kumar Bansal vs State of HP & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024:HHC:4780)

Click here to read/download the Judgment


Himachal Pradesh High CourtJustice Rakesh KainthlaPOCSOA

Ananya Soni