Supreme Court: In a case concerning allegations of sexual assault under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) against a Geography teacher accused of beating 2 minor girl students and touching their backs, waists and necks while teaching them, a Division Bench of Ujjal Bhuyan and Atul S. Chandurkar, JJ., examined whether such conduct, in the absence of the requisite “sexual intent”, could constitute sexual assault under Section 7, POCSO Act and attract the aggravated offence under Section 10. The Court held that although a teacher is expected to exercise greater sensitivity while dealing with young students, particularly girl students, inappropriate physical conduct or corporal punishment, by itself and without the requisite sexual intent, could not justify prosecution under the stringent provisions of the POCSO Act. Holding that continuation of the proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of law and cause extreme prejudice to the accused; the Court quashed the criminal proceedings.
Background
The accused, a Geography teacher at Loknathpur High School, Alipurduar, West Bengal, was accused of sexually assaulting minor girl students. The allegations arose after 2 Class X students complained that the accused had beaten them with his hands when they were unable to answer questions or complete their lessons. It was also alleged that he touched their backs and waists and, in one instance, touched a student’s neck.
Following a Counselling-cum-Enquiry Report by the District Child Protection Unit, an FIR was registered under Section 10, POCSO Act.
The accused approached the Calcutta High Court under Section 528, Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) seeking quashing of the proceedings. The High Court dismissed his plea, following which he approached the Supreme Court.
Analysis and Decision
The Court examined Sections 7, 9(f) and 10, POCSO Act.
The Court noted that Section 7 requires “sexual intent” for an act to constitute sexual assault. Section 9(f) makes sexual assault aggravated when committed by a member of the management or staff of an educational institution against a child in that institution.
The Court observed that although the accused’s conduct as a teacher was inappropriate, particularly his use of corporal punishment and lack of sensitivity while dealing with girl students, the statements of the 2 students did not establish the sexual intent necessary to constitute an offence under Section 10, POCSO Act.
The Court said that a POCSO prosecution against a teacher can have severe and irreversible consequences for his professional and personal life, and that even a subsequent acquittal may not be sufficient to undo the damage caused by a criminal trial.
The Court observed that while the accused being a teacher, needed to be more sensitive when dealing with young students, particularly girl students, his inappropriate conduct or use of corporal punishment, in the absence of the requisite sexual intent, could not by itself justify prosecution under the stringent provisions of the POCSO Act.
The Court also took note of the delay in lodging the FIR and observed that the statements of the Headmaster and teachers were essentially hearsay.
The Court held that continuation of the prosecution would amount to an abuse of the process of law and cause extreme prejudice to the accused.
Accordingly, the Court set aside the Calcutta High Court’s order dated 27 April 2026 and quashed the entire proceedings.
[Bhaskar Paul v. State of W.B., 2026 SCC OnLine SC 1833, 8-9-2026]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For Petitioner(s): Dr. Arjun Chowdhary, Adv., Mr. Uday Sanakr Sarkar, Adv., Mr. Junaid Ali Khan, Adv., Mr. Ahmed Nabeel Rizvi, Adv., Mr. Suneet Singh, Adv., Mr. Abdul Mannan, Adv, Mr. Yasser Wali, Adv, Mr. Irshad Ahmad, AOR
For Respondent(s): Mr. Nishant Awana, AOR
