HC terms teacher accused of sexual harassment ‘predator’, denies bail

The teacher had written a message on the question paper of the girl and had harassed her, it was alleged. He was on duty in the examination hall as an invigilator where the complainant was appearing

Chandigarh: The Punjab and Haryana high court has termed a teacher “predator” who was accused of sexually harassing a girl during the matriculation exam in Ludhiana earlier this year.

The Punjab and Haryana high court has termed a teacher “predator” who was accused of sexually harassing a girl during the matriculation exam in Ludhiana earlier this year.

“In today’s times, when women are being encouraged to be independent, a school-going girl needs to be given a sense of security so that she can learn, grow and earn without fear. However, predators like petitioner pose a serious threat to young girls and do not deserve any sympathy from the court,” the bench of justice Suvir Sehgal observed denying bail to the accused teacher, Gurjit Singh.

The teacher had written a message on the question paper of the girl and had harassed her, it was alleged. He was on duty in the examination hall as an invigilator where the complainant was appearing. The victim had filed a complaint after obtaining a legal opinion, an FIR was registered under Section 354-A of Indian Penal Code and Section 12 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act at Raikot tehsil in Ludhiana on April 8.

The teacher claimed in HC that the girl had made a similar complaint in December 2021 against someone else, which was found false. The fresh complaint has been filed to extort money, he alleged.

The government counsel had told court that the girl had supported the allegations in a statement before a magistrate. The court was informed that the complainant’s father called up the accused teacher on his mobile phone and the conversation was recorded, wherein he (teacher) admitted to having committed a mistake.

“A young 14-year-old schoolgirl of an impressionable age has undergone trauma at the hands of the petitioner. The petitioner is a teacher, who was deputed as an invigilator at the examination centre where the prosecutrix was appearing for matriculation examination. He is in a position to influence the young prosecutrix and can exploit the situation,” the bench further observed, denying the bail. In view of the facts of the case, nature of allegations, gravity of offence allegedly committed, the intention and objective behind enactment of the POCSO Act, the petitioner does not deserve grant of anticipatory bail, the bench added.