A year after Badlapur sexual assault, HC irked over persisting lack of security measures

The Bombay High Court criticized the state for neglecting safety norms for schools, urging compliance with guidelines following a 2024 child assault case.

Mumbai: The Bombay High Court on Friday was irked by how a Government Resolution (GR) mandating norms for the safety of school-going children has been neglected by the state. A division bench of justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Sandesh Patil were hearing a suo motu (of one’s own interest) Public Interest Litigation the court had initiated after the 2024 Badlapur sexual assault of two young girls.

A year after Badlapur sexual assault, HC irked over persisting lack of security measures

In August 2024, a 23-year-old cleaner, Akshay Shinde, was accused of assaulting two four-year-old girls. After one of the girls complained to her parents, the matter was taken to the school principal, the school trust, and eventually the police, sparking an outcry in the state due to the lack of safety measures for children, and the way the school authorities had reacted to the incident.

The high court, in a suo motu PIL ordered the formation of an expert committee to review safety protocols for children in government and private schools. On May 13, the Maharashtra Department of School Education and Sports issued a GR with new guidelines and measures for the safety of children in schools, but in the Friday’s hearing the court held recommendations were yet to be implemented seriously.

The 23-page GR had suggested enhanced CCTV surveillance of classroom entrances, corridors, main entrances and exits, playgrounds, and outside toilets. It also called for counselling support, and improved handling of child abuse cases, and collaboration between schools, parents, and relevant authorities. The court had ordered the state to file compliance reports detailing the schools’ compliance to the GR, but Rebecca Gonsalvez, amicus curiae (friend of the court hired to offer expert advice on a matter), said the state had “grossly failed” to monitor the GR’s implementation.

Gonsalvez pointed out that the state had failed to provide a list of schools that government officials had visited, and had not mentioned whether these were residential schools. In a note submitted to the court, she added that the state’s affidavit contained no mention of how inspections were carried out, and whether officers had been given a checklist to verify the school’s compliance with the GR. She also said the state had not reported whether Anganwadis, Ashramshalas and Observation Homes for children had been visited. As per Gonsalvez, 12 key aspects of the GR had not been checked by the education officers.

The bench said, “Are you waiting for another incident? Even after that you will shy away from taking responsibility.” The court pointed out that many public schools did not have complaint boxes.

“Orders are to be complied with. Today we are in September, and these orders were passed in May. Public schools have still not complied with the GR,” the court said, asking the state who should be held responsible for this delay and inaction.

Prajakta Shinde, representing the state, said that education officers visit 10 schools per week as a “default exercise” and have now also begun checking the school’s compliance with the GR.

She said, “Anganwadi and ashram schools come under the tribal department, the education department’s GR is not applicable to them,” and added that the Women and Children department could also issue a similar GR for safety guidelines in private schools.

The bench replied, “We are not concerned with the internal working of the state. What action are your officers taking?” The court said that if education officers were visiting schools they must be reporting to the authorities. “Tell us what the data is,” the court asked.

As per data given to the Gonsalvez by the state education department, she said, “Out of the 63,887 government schools in the state, more than half the schools don’t have CCTV cameras or any safety measures for transporting children to and from schools. Only around a third of these schools have carried out character verification of the staff.” She added that from the 44,435 private schools throughout the state, nearly a quarter of schools did not have CCTV cameras and had not verified characters of the teachers. The court stressed that such data needed to be made public and directed the state to form a website where the state can upload school-wise compliance to the GR.

The court told the state, “Why don’t you put a checklist for compliance for the GR. Upload the information about schools on the website. Give them 10-15 days time to comply and keep a follow up.” The bench added that parents also needed to be aware of these safety protocols, and then parent teacher associations can take up the issue at least in private schools.”

The court said, “The schools also have to be named. Even lay people should be able to access it (the website). We are not satisfied with the way this matter is being handled. Give the website publicity,” the court said, adding that Gonsalvez would update them about the website.