‘Misused dominating position’: Kerala High Court refuses to quash POCSO case against teacher despite settlement

Highlighting the nature of the work, the court added that a teacher is expected to be a role model to others and expected to inculcate good values in their students under their control.

The order noted that the parents send their wards to such institutions, believing that the teacher will take care of the ward like his/her own children.

Findings

• The dispute between the petitioner and the survivor was indeed settled, and the mother of the survivor filed an affidavit stating that the dispute had been settled and also that she has no objection to quashing the proceedings against the petitioner.
• However, it is to be noted that the survivor is still a minor.
• At least three more similar cases are pending against the petitioner, who is a teacher by profession.
• In that case, the court is not inclined to quash the proceedings against the petitioner, as it will give a wrong message to society.

Background

• The petitioner, a teacher, had filed the petition seeking for suashing all further proceedings against him in the case under Sections 75(1)(i) (physical contact and advances involving unwelcome and explicit sexual overtures) of BNS and Sections 8 (punishment for sexual assault), 7 (sexual assault), 10 (unishment for aggravated sexual assault), 9(c) (whoever being a public servant commits sexual assault on a child), 9(f) (whoever being on the management or staff of an educational institution or religious institution, commits sexual assault on a child in that institution), 9(m) (whoever commits sexual assault on a child below twelve years), 9(p) (whoever, being in a position of trust or authority of a child, commits sexual assault on the child in an institution or home of the child or anywhere else) of POCSO Act, 2012.
• According to the FIR, the teacher sexually abused a minor student in the school.
• The petitioner argued that the entire dispute between the parties was settled and therefore, he prayed for quashing all further proceedings against the petitioner.
• The prosecution strongly opposed the petition mainly on the ground that several cases of a similar nature are pending against the petitioner.