Person Having Knowledge Of Offence Under POCSO Act Must Report To Police, Not Investigate Themselves: Punjab And Haryana HC
The Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed a Petition, seeking to quash an FIR registered under Section 306 Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sections 6, 18, 8, and 21 of the Protection of the Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2022 (Act), against the Principal (Petitioner) of a private school in Faridabad.
The Court noted that the Act was enacted to protect children's rights and ensure their safety. The Court emphasized that the obligation of the person, having knowledge of such information, was not to investigate the matter themselves, but as per the provisions of the Act, ought to report the matter to the Police.
Justice Harnaresh Singh Gill observed, “The emphasis, therefore, is on the safety and security of the child and maintaining the confidentiality of his/her right to privacy. 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”.
Senior Advocate Vinod Ghai appeared for the Petitioner, and Additional Advocate Generals Rupinder Singh Jhand and Ankita Ahuja appeared for the State. Senior Advocate Sumeet Goel appeared for Respondent no. 2 and Advocate ADS Sukhija appeared as Amicus Curiae.
The Petitioner was accused of not taking appropriate action after a student was harassed and bullied, which led to the student's suicide. The principal did not report the matter to the authorities but instead tried to investigate and resolve the matter herself. The student's mother has filed a police report against the principal, alleging that she did not follow the procedures outlined in the Act.
The Court noted that the Petitioner had received an email about the bullying five months before the student had committed suicide. Therefore, the reasons for the students' departure from the school were irrelevant to the case and the Petitioner could still be tried under the POCSO Act. Additionally, the Court emphasised that the Act also aims to protect the privacy and confidentiality of the child throughout the judicial process.
"Thus, the petitioner cannot plead excuses for not reporting the matter to the police for nearly five months…The argument of the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner that in the absence of the children, who were alleged part of the incident of harassment and bullying, the petitioner cannot be tried under Section 21 of the POCSO Act, cannot be accepted, for the simple reason that the reasons for the said students leaving the School or their possible expulsion from the School, cannot be gone into by this Court, in the present proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C”, the Court observed.
Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the petition.
Cause Title: Surjeet Khanna v State of Haryana and Anr
