In a notable decision, the Delhi High Court has annulled a First Information Report (FIR) filed nine years ago against a teacher accused of slapping a young student who struggled to recite the alphabet. Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta delivered the ruling, citing an amicable settlement between the parties and the futility of continuing the case.
Case Background
The case began on February 27, 2015, when an FIR (No. 0244/2015) was lodged at the Madhu Vihar Police Station under Section 23 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, with additional charges under Sections 323 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) later included. The complaint was made by the child's mother, referred to as 'S', who claimed that her son, X, came home from Step Forward School with facial injuries. The child alleged that his teacher, Suman Vijay, had slapped him for not reciting the alphabet.
Legal Proceedings and Investigation
The investigation took an unusual turn when the child's statement wasn’t recorded until five years after the incident. Justice Mendiratta criticized this delay, noting, "It is surprising that after filing the chargesheet, the Magistrate directed the recording of the victim's statement on January 9, 2020, without considering the value of such a delayed statement."
The court also noted that the investigation did not involve a child psychologist or counselor to assess if the young child could accurately recall the event.
Medical Examination and Charges
A medical examination revealed only minor bruises on the child’s cheeks. The chargesheet was based on the mother’s statement and this medical report. However, the court found no clear motive for the teacher to cause harm, and she denied any wrongdoing.
Settlement and Court’s Decision
On March 16, 2024, an amicable settlement was reached between the teacher and the child's mother, confirmed in court as being free of coercion. Justice Mendiratta highlighted the need to consider the severity of the offense when deciding whether to dismiss an FIR. He stated, "The High Court is not barred from examining whether sufficient evidence exists to support the charges."
The court concluded that continuing the case would be pointless and an abuse of legal process. As a result, the FIR and all associated proceedings were quashed.
AdvoTalks: Talk to Lawyer https://www.advotalks.com/
for More Legal Updates visit our youtube channel
.jpeg&w=80&h=80&crop-to-fit)
