The Court emphasized that the ultimate goal of education is to nurture responsible citizens who understand and uphold the core principles of the Indian Constitution. It urged the state to focus on this, especially as India celebrates 75 years of its Constitution. The Court granted the state a month to take action and submit an affidavit on the matter within six weeks.

Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih expressed concern over the UP-government’s failure to follow earlier directions, particularly those regarding the inclusion of constitutional values in education. They reaffirmed that without teaching values of equality, secularism, and fraternity, true quality education cannot be achieved, as per a Live Law report.

Background of the Case

In the month of August 2023, a minor Muslim student was scolded and hurled communal remarks by his school teacher Tripta Tyagi, for allegedly not doing his homework. The teacher also asked other students to slap the minor boy. She could be heard saying, “Go to any Muslim child’s area…” suggesting a pejorative statement. Furthermore, she instructed the fellow students to “hit harder”. The video of the incident went viral on social media and created nationwide outrage.

Following the incident, Tushar Gandhi filed a petition in the Supreme Court to ensure independent investigation in the matter. Subsequently, the teacher was booked under Sections 302 (punishment for voluntarily causing hurt) and 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace) of the Indian Penal Code, which are non-cognisable offences. Only after a long delay and rap from SC, the FIR was finally filed by the police incorporating the additional charges under Section 295A of IPC, which deals with acts that deliberately and maliciously outrage religious feelings of any class, and Section 75 of Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, which relates to punishment for cruelty to child.

The SC began hearing the petition in month of September 2023, and since then has issued several directions to the State Government with regards to the filing of FIR, invocation of relevant charges based on the evidence, admission of the victim student in the private school of their choice of school under the EWS quota, counselling of the victim and other students, and seeking compliance reports at various stages. The court has rebuked the State more than once for its repeated non-compliance of the court’s orders.

Prohibition on subjecting a child to physical punishment or mental harassment

On September 25, 2023, while hearing the petition, the division bench of Justice Abhay S. Oka and Pankaj Mittal considering the manner in which police had delayed action, the bench directed the investigation shall be conducted under the supervision of a senior IPS Officer, and the court also directed for submitting the compliance report to this Court on this aspect and for reporting the progress made in the investigation.

Moreover, in relation to ensure the good quality in elementary education, the bench directed that this is the obligation of the local authorities under Section 9(h) of the RTE Act.

The bench noted that “under sub-section (1) of Section 17 of the RTE Act, there is a complete prohibition on subjecting a child to physical punishment or mental harassment. If the allegations made by the parents of the victim are correct, this may be the worst kind of physical punishment imparted by a teacher inasmuch as the teacher directed other students to give physical punishment to the victim.”

“When the object of the RTE Act is to provide quality education, unless there is an effort made to inculcate the importance of constitutional values in the students, especially the core values of equality, secularism and fraternity, there cannot be any quality education. There cannot be quality education if, in a school, a student is sought to be penalised only on the ground that he belongs to a particular community. Thus, there is a prima facie failure on the part of the State to comply with the mandatory obligations under the RTE Act and the Rules framed thereunder” the strongly stressed.

No child is subjected to caste, class, religious or gender abuse or discrimination in the school

During the hearing on September 25, 2023, the bench observed that under sub-rule (3) of Rule 5 of the said Rules framed by the State Government, there is a mandate that the local authority shall be responsible for ensuring that no child is subjected to caste, class, religious or gender abuse or discrimination in the school.

The bench directed that “the State Government is under an obligation to enforce and implement the provisions of the RTE Act and the said Rules.”

The bench noted that the victim must have undergone trauma, and directed that “we direct the State Government to ensure that proper counselling is extended to the victim of the offence through an expert child counsellor. Even the other students, who were involved in the incident, in the sense that they allegedly followed the mandate issued by the teacher and assaulted the victim, need counselling by an expert child counsellor. The State Government will take immediate steps to do the needful by providing services of an expert child counsellor.”

State must make proper arrangements for providing quality education

The Court, in light of the gravity and sensitivity of the incident at hand, has directed that the State must address a critical issue. Specifically, the Court has emphasized that “the State will have to answer one more important question. The question is what educational facilities the State will extend to the victim of the offence for discharging its obligations under the RTE Act and Article 21A of the Constitution, which means that the State must make proper arrangements for providing quality education to the victim in terms of the provisions of the RTE Act. The State cannot expect the child to continue in the same school.”

Further directed that;

“The senior police officer appointed in terms of this order shall submit a compliance report as well as a report on steps taken in the investigation. He shall provide to this Court the copies of the transcripts of the conversation in the video clip of the alleged incident.”

“The State shall submit the compliance report on providing better education facilities to the victim of the offence and complying with the direction to undertake counselling of the victim and other students through an expert child psychologist. After looking at the report, we will consider whether further directions are required to be issued to ensure that there is no violation of sub-section (1) of Section 17 of the RTE Act.”

“The RTE Act is aimed at providing compulsory elementary education to strengthen the social fabric of our democracy. The emphasis is on giving equal opportunities to all to get access to the facilities of education. Moreover, there are detailed guidelines for eliminating Corporal Punishment in Schools laid down by the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights established under the provisions of the Commissions for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005. We direct the State Government to place on record the said guidelines.”

The Supreme Court order dated 25.09.2023 can be read here

Related:

SC directs UP government to immediately sanction prosecution of teacher accused of instructing students to beat Muslim child

Supreme Court: Directs UP government to comply with directions and implement wholistic reparations

Lack of compliance with orders of the Supreme Court by UP government in Muzaffarnagar slapping case- a worrisome and “shocking” spectacle

The post No quality education without teaching equality, secularism, fraternity value: SC appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In addition to this, the accused had also been charged with second proviso of section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (care and protection of children) Act, 2015 (JJ Act). Notably, the second proviso of section 75 of the JJ Act pertains to the offence of assault or abuse upon a child, causing the minor unnecessary mental or physical suffering, by any person employed by or managing an organisation, which is entrusted with the care and protection of the child.

A bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Pankaj Mithal was hearing the seeking speedy investigation into the aforementioned case by Tushar Gandhi, the great-grandson of Mahatma Gandhi.

Brief background of the case:

In the month of August, a video of a Muslim boy being beaten up, slapped and humiliated in front of the entire class in a school in Uttar Pradesh surfaced on social media. The video showed the accused teacher making communal comments and ordering her students to slap a Muslim classmate for not doing his homework. The incident created outrage on social media.

On August 26, a case was registered against a teacher in Muzaffarnagar who allegedly encouraged her students to slap a classmate. The FIR was registered against the school teacher under Section 323 (punishment for causing voluntary hurt) and Section 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC).

Content of the petition:

The petition was filed by Tushar Gandhi in the beginning of September. The petition sought for an independent and time-bound investigation in the case. The petition further urged for the invocation of several offences prescribed under IPC including Section 153A (Promoting enmity between different groups on ground of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony) and Section 298 (Uttering, words, etc., with deliberate intent to wound the religious feelings of any person) of IPC. Direction had also been sought for investigation of offences under JJ Act.

The petition had also submitted that there had been a breach of guidelines enumerated in Tehseen S. Poonawalla vs Union of India, (2018) 9 SCC 501, that inter-alia requires the police to ensure that there is no further harassment of the family members of the victims upon the FIR being lodged.

Observations by the Court

The Supreme Court bench noted that the affidavit filed by the Inspector General of Police of Meerut Range has provided that aforementioned sections have been invoked against the accused and that government sanction is awaited. The order stated, “A perusal of the Report submitted by the I.G., Meerut Range, Uttar Pradesh, shows that now the second proviso to Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 has been applied. Even Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, “IPC”) has been applied. It is stated that investigation has been completed and the Government’s sanction for applying Section 295A of the IPC is awaited. We direct the Government to immediately take a decision on the request for grant of sanction.”

During the hearing, advocate Shadan Farasat, appearing for petitioner Tushar Gandhi, had provided that the father of the child had contacted them and brought to their notice that the child victim is traumatised and does not want to meet or interact with anybody after the incident.

Through its order, the court referred to the affidavit submitted by the father of the victim which highlighted the victim being in a state of trauma. The order states “Today, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has tendered an affidavit dated 28th October, 2023 of the father of the victim child. He states that as an officer of the Court, he has tried to interact with the victim child, but found that the child is severely traumatized.”

It further said “When it comes to the future of the victim child and his welfare, the state cannot treat this litigation as adversarial.”

“We see that he is traumatised and is in need of special kind of counselling. I will file an affidavit in this regard,” Advocate Farasat had said, emphasizing that whichever school the child will now be admitted to, he will be in need of continuous counselling.

In regards to this, the counsel appearing for the department of education submitted that a committee of three psychologists had been formed and it visited the child’s home to examine him. “We have been informed that the child is introverted since the very beginning and therefore the doctors have requested the child and his parents to come to the counselling centre,” the counsel provided.

The bench highlighted the issue of a traumatized child being required to come to the counselling centre. As per a report of the New Indian Express, the Bench then requested Additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj, appearing for the Uttar Pradesh government’s home department, to take instructions on the availability of an expert agency like NIMHANS (National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences) and Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS), which can go to the victim’s village and counsel him and other school children.

“Mr. Nataraj, can you take instructions, are there any institutions like NIMHANS, which play a very active role for children? Just find out, we will entrust the work to them. We will appoint NIMHANS or TISS and ask them to go there and give counselling,” the bench had said.

In regards to this, the bench may consider appointing an expert counsellor for the “severely traumatized” victim as well as the other students who were involved in this incident the order states “We are putting the state to notice that we may consider appointing an expert agency for the purposes of counselling not only the victim but the other children, who were involved in the alleged incident.”

As per a report of the Business Standard, the bench also directed the state to place on record the detailed guidelines laid down by the NCPCR about imposing physical punishment on students. The matter has now been posted for further hearing on November 6. As per the report, the court will “threadbare” examine the affidavits filed by the state.

In the earlier hearing, on September 25, the Supreme Court had remarked that there cannot be quality education if a student is sought to be penalised on the ground that he belongs to a particular community. The Court had also pulled up the Uttar Pradesh government for conducting a “shoddy probe” into this case. Explicitly voicing their displeasure over the incident, the top court had directed the UP government to appoint a senior IPS officer within a week to probe the case.

While directing that the IPS officer shall file a report in the apex court, it had asked the state government to conduct counselling of the alleged victim and other students involved in the incident by professional counsellors.

The order can be accessed here:

Related:

Outrageous, hate corrodes UP classrooms

Hate Speeches on the rise in UP and Uttarakhand

UP: Another teacher asks student to slap classmate, complaint lodged

UP: School question paper, on ‘Indian Muslim Terrorism’, calls for India to prepare for war with Pak

Dalit youth hung upside down and tortured for alleged goat theft in Telangana

The post SC directs UP government to immediately sanction prosecution of teacher accused of instructing students to beat Muslim child appeared first on SabrangIndia.