'No Quality Education If Student Is Penalised Based On Religion' : Supreme Court Slams UP Govt & Police On Muzaffarnagar Student Slapping

The Supreme Court on Monday expressed dissatisfaction with the manner in which the Uttar Pradesh Police has dealt with Muzaffarnagar school student slapping case, in which a primary school teacher punished a Muslim boy by asking other students to slap him.

Raising questions at the delay in the registration of the FIR and the omission of allegations regarding communal hatred from it, the bench directed that the case be investigated by a senior IPS-ranked police officer.

The Court further observed that there is "prima facie failure on the part of the State" to comply with the mandate of the Right to Education Act, which prohibits physical and mental harassment of students and their discrimination on the basis of religion and caste.

"If the allegation is correct, this may be the worst kind of physical punishment imparted by a teacher, inasmuch as the teacher directed other students to assault the victim..", the Court observed in the order.

The Court noted that though the complaint filed by the student's father related to cognizable offences, no First Information Report (FIR) was immediately registered. Only a non-cognizable report was filed initially and the FIR was registered "after a long delay" on September 6, almost two weeks after the incident.

Communal allegations absent in the FIR

Hearing a PIL filed social activist Tushar Gandhi alleging State inaction in the incident, a bench comprising Justices Abhay S Oka and Justice Pankaj Mithal noted that the FIR has omitted the allegations made by the victim's father regarding communal targeting.

"We have serious objection to the manner in which FIR is registered", Justice Oka orally said.  "In the first complaint by the father, he has alleged that teacher is making objectionable comments against a particular religion. In the so-called non-cognizable report, same allegations are there. In the FIR, these allegations are not there", the judge said. The judge also asked about the absence of the the transcript of the video in the FIR.

Justice Oka further said that the allegations, if true, should "shock the conscience of the State".

"This is a very serious issue. Teacher telling students to hit a classmate because they belong to a particular community! Is this quality education? State must take responsibility of the education of the child. If the allegations are true, this should shock the conscience of the state", Justice Oka asked.

Additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj, appearing for the State of Uttar Pradesh, said that the State was not shielding anyone, but added that the "communal angle was being blown out of the proportion". But the bench seemingly disagreed, pointing out to the transcript of the video.

"Transcript says so. This shouldn't be taken lightly. If this incident is correct - teacher telling students that he belongs to a particular community, beat him, what kind of education is being imparted?", Justice Oka said.

Advocate Shadan Farasat, appearing for the petitioner, pointed out that the the FIR does not include the offence relating to promotion of communal hatred under Section 153A IPC. At present, it mentions offences under Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2015, Section 323 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code. Apart from these offences, the offence under second proviso to Section 75 Act and Section 153A IPC should also be applied, he contended.

Taking note of these arguments, the bench stated in the order :

"Considering the manner in which the police have taken action, and especially in the light of the fact that though a cognizable offence was committed and a NCR was registered, investigation shall be done by a senior IPS level officer nominated by the State Government within one week. The officer so nominated shall go into the question whether proviso to Sec 75 of the JJ Act and 153A IPC have to be invoked"

'There can't be quality education if a student is penalised only on the ground of religion'

In the order, the bench referred to the provisions of the RTE Act and the Rules, which prohibit mental and physical harassment of students and their discrimination,

"There cannot be any quality education if a student is sought to be penalised only on the ground that he belongs to a particular community. There is a prima facie failure on the part of the State to comply with mandatory obligations of RTE Act and rules", the bench observed.

Under the rules framed by UP government under RTE Act, the local authority is required to ensure that no child is subjected to caste, class, religious, or gender abuse or discrimination in school. "So, there cannot be any religious abuse in a school", the Court said.

The bench directed the State to provide counselling to the victim student with the services of a professional counsellor. The Court stressed that the other students, who were asked by the teacher to beat the victim, also need to be counselled.

"The State will have to answer the important question as to what facilities it will extend to the victim of the offence under the RTE Act for his quality education as per the Act. The State cannot expect the child to continue in the same school", the bench stated.

The Court also impleaded the Secretary of State Education Dept in the matter and directed the filing of a compliance report regarding the counselling and better educational facilities given to the victim.

After looking at the State's report, the Court will consider whether further directions are required to be issued to ensure that there is no violation of the RTE Act. The Court also directed the State to place on record the detailed guidelines laid down by NCPCR about imposing physical punishment for students. 

The matter will be considered next on October 30. 

State questions the locus of the petitioner

During the argument, ASG objected to the petitioner invoking his status as the great grandson of Mahatma Gandhi. However, the bench said that it can even treat the petition as a suo motu proceeding, considering the fact that it raises allegations of State inaction at the violations of fundamental rights.

"In a case like this, the State should not be concerned with the locus of the petitioner, inasmuch as this is a case where not only was the criminal law process was not set in motion, but there was a violation of fundamental rights and RTE Act", the Court stated.

 On the last occasion, the court directed the Muzaffarnagar police superintendent to submit a report on the investigation's progress and the steps taken to protect the minor victim, while issuing notice.