Karnataka High Court: While considering the instant petition seeking quashment of FIR registered for offences punishable under Section 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act); the Bench of M. Nagaprasanna, J., taking note of the fact that the petitioner was a school teacher who had allegedly shot videos and took pictures of girl children at the time when they were changing their dresses, refused to quash the proceedings, stating that being a teacher it was indecorous on the part of the petitioner and the alleged offence is unpardonable, albeit prima facie.
The Court strictly observed that the offence against the petitioner is a shade more than horrendous. “More than horrendous, I say, for the reason that the petitioner is a teacher (…) If this cannot become a crime, it is not understandable as to what else can be”.
Background and Contentions:
The petitioner was appointed as a drawing teacher in Murarji Desai Residential School, Tekal Hobli, Malur Taluk, Kolar District. On 15-12-2023, the Joint Director of Social Welfare Department received a complaint about the petitioner for offence under Section 12, POCSO Act. For the allegedly recording videos and clicking photographs of minor girl students in the residential school when they were changing their dresses.
As soon as the crime was registered and investigation started, the petitioner approached the High Court.
The petitioner denied any wrongdoing and stated that even before the registration of crime, his mobile phone was seized on 15-12-2023 i.e., the moment initial complaint was filed. It was further argued that there was no compliance with Section 65-B of Evidence Act, 1872 for the contents in the mobile phone, as it is electronic evidence. The petitioner also argued that the complaint was full of corrections and certain information was added later to wreak vengeance upon him as he had complained about using the children to clean water and sewerage tanks.
Per contra, the State argued that the petitioner had shot videos and taken photographs of girls/children of Morarji Desai Residential School while they were changing their dress. How he took them and stored them is a matter of evidence.
Court’s Assessment:
Perusing the facts, contentions and complaint against the petitioner, the Court had to consider whether the crime registered under Section 12 of the POCSO Act had its ingredients in the contents of the complaint so registered on 15-12-2023.
The Court took note Sections 11 and 12 of POCSO Act which define sexual harassment of a child and punishment for such harassment respectively.
The Court also considered the papers of investigation placed on record detailing the seized articles that were sent to Forensic Science Laboratory and took note that petitioner had 5 mobile phones of different brands. All the mobile phones were seized and sent to FSL. Each of the mobile phones had close to 1000 images and several hundred videos. “The petitioner is a drawing teacher. Why he is in possession of 5 mobile phones, and what are the videos and pictures therein, are all a matter of investigation”.
The Court pointed out that it is inexplicable that the drawing teacher in Morarji Desai Residential School holds 5 mobile devices, and the same “can be thrashed out only in an investigation or a full-blown trial”.
The Court thus opined that it is for the petitioner to come out clean in a full-blown trial, as any entertainment of the petition at this juncture, at the stage of registration of crime, would be putting a premium on the illegal activities of the petitioner.
[Muniyappa v. State of Karnataka, 2024 SCC OnLine Kar 78, decided on 31-8-2024]
Order by Justice M. Nagaprasanna
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For petitioner: Sri S.P. Kulkarni, Sr. Advocate A/W Sri Vasanthakumar K.M., Advocate
For State: Sri B.N. Jagadeesha, Addl. SPP
Buy Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 HERE
