Read Time: 08 minutes

Synopsis

The Supreme Court has on April 23, 2025 said holding the hands of female students by a teacher in computer lab, while using mouse, clearly falls within the ambit of 'any other act with sexual intent which involves physical contact’, punishable under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

"In the context of a teacher-student relationship, where the teacher is in a position of authority and trust, such physical contact, when accompanied by other inappropriate behavior including asking invasive questions about sanitary napkins and sending vulgar images, provides sufficient basis to infer sexual intent for the purpose of proceeding with trial," a bench of Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh said.   

The court allowed an appeal against the Kerala High Court order which quashed multiple FIRs lodged against a computer teacher, Rajesh Kumar from a school in Kerala on complaints filed by girl students.

"This case is a glaring example of denial of justice to the victims of offences under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, and possibly certain provisions of the Indian Penal Code. The victims were students in a school in Tirur, where respondent No.1 was a Computer Teacher," the bench added.

The bench stated that it only wanted to note that the High Court should not have overlooked the fact that respondent No.1 was a teacher and the victims were his students. The initial statements given to the police indicated that there was sufficient preliminary evidence to suggest offences under the POCSO Act, justifying a trial.

"We fail to understand as to how the High Court construed that Section 7 of the POCSO Act will not be attracted unless there is an act involving physical contact with sexual intent," the bench further said.

The court pointed out Section 7 of the POCSO Act defined ‘sexual assault to include situations where a person 'with sexual intent touches the vagina, penis, anus or breast of the child or makes the child touch the vagina, penis, anus or breast of such person or any other person, or does any other act with sexual intent which involves physical contact without penetration’.

The bench felt the issue has been apparently pre-judged by the High Court without even permitting the victims to enter witness box and depose about various instances. Court set aside the impugned judgment of the High Court and directed the Trial Court to proceed on the basis of charge sheet and conclude the matter for framing of charges within two weeks. Directions were also issued to the Trial Court for taking up the matter at least twice in a month, and first of all, record the statements of all alleged victims.

Brief Background

It was alleged that the teacher behaved inappropriately with the female students of the school besides asking obnoxious questions like how many sanitary napkins they had used in a year. It was alleged that he would hold the hands of the students in the computer lab while using a mouse in the lab and do other inappropriate actions. 

The female students made complaints to the Principal of the school, who directed the Head of the Department to inspect the computer lab where several female magazines and CDs containing questionable content were recovered.

A show-cause notice was issued to respondent, who was stated to have apologised and promised to improve his conduct in future.

However, he allegedly did not mend his ways and continued to misbehave with the female students to the extent that he sent vulgar and obscene images on the WhatsApp group, thinking that these numbers belong to the students whereas the students had actually given the numbers of their parents.

The Parents Teachers Association then filed a writ petition before the High Court and it was only upon judicial intervention that an FIR was finally registered.

Case Title: X etc. v. Rajesh Kumar