The High Court refused to quash an application seeking to add a school student’s mother as an accused for failing to report the alleged sexual harassment of her son at his school to the police.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently held that a parent is also mandatorily required to inform the police or Special Juvenile Police Unit (SPJU) about the commission of any offence against their child under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.
ALSO READ: Rahul Gandhi Robber | NBDSA Orders Aaj Tak to Remove Video Depicting Rahul as Robber
Justice Deepak Gupta made a crucial observation while refusing to quash an application pending before the trial court, which sought to add a child victim’s mother as an accused for failing to report the sexual harassment of her son to the police. The child, a student of Faridabad’s Delhi Public School, tragically died by suicide in 2022.
The plea before the trial court aimed to hold the mother accountable as an accused in the criminal case related to her son’s death, due to her alleged failure to report the sexual harassment to the authorities.
The police had registered a case under Section 306 (abetment of suicide) and provisions of the POCSO Act against the school Principal Surjeet Khanna and Headmistress Mamta Gupta. Following the dismissal of her petition for quashing the First Information Report (FIR) by the High Court, Khanna sought to involve the victim’s mother in the case, accusing her of failing to report the alleged offences.
On July 18, 2020, the trial court required the victim’s mother to respond to this application. Subsequently, she approached the High Court seeking to quash this application.
The High Court concluded that the mother was indeed mandatorily required to report the offences to the police or Special Juvenile Police Unit (SJPU) under the POCSO Act. It was noted that the mother had emailed the school about her son’s bullying and sexual harassment, indicating her awareness of the offences under the POCSO Act well before informing the school authorities.
The Court stated,
“As such, prima facie, the mother was mandatorily required to inform the local police or the SJPU about the same as per Section 19 of the POCSO Act.”
Furthermore, the High Court dismissed the petition by Khanna against the trial court’s decision to issue a notice to the victim’s mother regarding her application. Khanna had argued that there was no legal procedure for serving notice to the proposed accused under certain sections of the CrPC and the POCSO Act. However, the Court rejected this argument, stating that each case has unique facts and circumstances that may necessitate a different legal procedure, not explicitly barred by law.
The Court also highlighted that the proposed accused, in this case, is the mother of the victim and the complainant herself, who is also a victim as the mother of a deceased child. It was deemed appropriate by the trial court to provide her an opportunity for a hearing first.
The Court emphasized,
“The Court still has to decide the application by applying its judicious mind in accordance with law. Consequently, this Court does not find any merit in the petition filed by the principal Mrs. Surjeet Khanna,”
-thereby dismissing the petitions.
This case underscores the legal obligations of individuals under the POCSO Act and the discretion courts have in dealing with unique circumstances surrounding each case.
READ/DOWNLOAD JUDGEMENT
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
