On Monday, the Kerala High Court approved anticipatory bail for a school headmistress who faced allegations of deliberately humiliating a 5th-grade student from the Scheduled Tribe (ST) community. The accusation stemmed from an incident where the headmistress reportedly forcibly cut the student's hair during a school assembly.
Justice K Babu raised doubts regarding whether the accused school teacher possessed mens rea (guilty intent) to insult the student or commit an offense under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act).
Upon determining the absence of prima facie material to support the charges under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, the Court proceeded to grant anticipatory bail to the accused teacher.
The accused teacher, serving as the headmistress of Kottamala MGM UP School in Kasaragod, had her anticipatory bail plea rejected by a Kasaragod sessions court. Subsequently, she sought relief from the High Court. The charges under the SC/ST Act were brought against her after an 11-year-old student claimed that she had forcefully cut his hair during a morning school assembly, resulting in ridicule and insults from fellow students.
The student (victim) stated that the teacher was fully aware of his belonging to the ST community. The incident allegedly led the victim and his sister to become hesitant about attending school in the subsequent days. In defense, the accused teacher's counsel argued that her actions were aimed at enforcing discipline for the child's growth and development. The headmistress further mentioned that she had personally visited the child's home to encourage both him and his sister to return to school when they were absent for a few days.
The counsel for the accused teacher contended that a baseless case had been filed against the headmistress at the instigation of specific individuals, citing rivalries between aided schools as a motive. The High Court, upon observing that the accused teacher's colleagues did not lend support to the allegations against her, eventually granted the anticipatory bail plea.
The appellant (headmistress) was represented by advocates S Rajeev, V Vinay, MS Aneer, Prerith Philip Joseph, Anilkumar CR, and KS Kiran Krishnan.
The State and and other respondents (including the victim) were represented by advocate PK Santhamma and Public Prosecutor G Sudheer.
Website designed, developed and maintained by webexy