Child's Testimony Can't Be Brushed Aside, Punjab & Haryana HC Upholds Teacher's Conviction For Sexually Assaulting Student In School

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has upheld the conviction of a school teacher for sexually assaulting a class 8th student under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act), while noting that the "occurrence took place in school premises."

Justice Amarjot Bhatti said, "as per facts of the case, it is fully covered under the provisions of Section 9 (f) of POCSO Act as victim was sexually assaulted by appellant/convict Sanjay Kumar while he was posted as Hindi Teacher and the victim was studying in the same school in 8th standard. Occurrence took place in the school premises. Therefore, considering the facts of the case, it is a case of aggravated sexual assault and he was rightly held guilty under Section 10 of the POCSO Act."

The Court was hearing an appeal against conviction passed by the trial court where the teacher was convicted under Section 10 of the POCSO Act, and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment of 5 years.

The victim was studying in 8th class in a Haryana's Government School and on the day of incident the teacher asked the victim to hold the his private private part in school and tried to force him to do so.

It was alleged by the victim's mother that the teacher was in a habit of indulging in such like activities in the school earlier and he remained under suspension for a long time.

After examining the submissions, the Court noted that the victim narrated the entire occurrence as he disclosed to his mother.

The court rejected the argument that the issue that sole testimony of victim cannot be safely relied upon and there is no independent corroboration to his version.

"It cannot be ignored that such like incidents take place in isolation. Therefore, no eye witness is expected. Even mother of the victim examined as PW-7 is not eye witness to the occurrence. She has filed complaint on the basis of facts disclosed to her by victim," noted the judge.

Justice Bhatti also highlighted that that the delay of two days in lodging FIR is insignificant.

"Usually it is seen when such like incident takes place with a child, firstly it takes time for the child to disclose about such like incident to family member and secondly, it further takes time for the family to ponder about such like incident for lodging report to the authorities," observed the judge.

The Court noted that in the present case, when victim came out of room, he informed Principal of the school but instead of taking any action, the child was told to keep silent and was warned not to disclose about the occurrence to his family.

In the light of the above, the Court did not find any infirmity in the conviction order and dismissed the appeal.

Mr. Prakash Kr. Singh Tomar, Advocate with Ms. Ritu Singh, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. Kanwar Sanjiv Kumar, AAG, Haryana.

Title: XXXXX v. State of Haryana