Bombay HC refuses protection from arrest to school chairman booked for abetting suicide of minor boy – The Indian Express

A single-judge bench of Justice Vinay G Joshi was hearing an anticipatory bail plea by Ganpatrao Janardhan Patil booked by the Shiroli MIDC police in Maharashtra’s Kolhapur district for offences punishable under Indian Penal Code (IPC) sections 305 (abetment of suicide of child ), 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace), 506 (criminal intimidation) and provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.

On April 2 this year, the deceased child’s grandfather lodged a complaint, stating that his grandson was studying in class 10 at a Symbolic International School, of which Patil was the chairman and his wife the principal. On April 1, the grandfather received a message asking him to come to the school.

After he went to the school, as per the complaint, he was asked to take his grandson back home. The boy disclosed to his grandfather that while he was playing football a goal post guard inadvertently hit a girl, causing her injury. Following this, Patil scolded and abused him in filthy language, the boy told the grandfather, said the complaint.

The grandfather told the police that he met the applicant to inquire about the same. Patil allegedly told him that his grandson had caused injury to the girl and is “ill-cultured and there are no chances of reformation and he is a slum boy”.

As per the complaint, the applicant also claimed that the school principal informed him that in the past that the boy had behaved unruly and he should be rusticated from the school. The FIR stated that the applicant uttered bad words to the boy in presence of a school teacher. The grandfather took the boy to his house, who within a few hours allegedly ended his life.

Advocates Hrishikesh Mundargi and Pravada Raut for applicant Patil argued that allegations at its face value, nowhere disclose adequate mens rea (criminal intention) and him being chairman of the school and part of the disciplinary authority, his act of reprimanding a student cannot be construed as sufficient instigation for the alleged suicide.

Advocate M R Tidke for the police opposed the plea stating that the applicant’s act of “humiliating, abusing and continuously harassing student” amounts to sufficient instigation as he died by suicide within a few hours of the incident. Tidke added that the probe was in progress and the applicant’s custodial interrogation was required for the same. Therefore, he should not be granted protection from arrest, the advocate argued.

After perusing submissions, Justice Joshi observed: “The utterances of the applicant are objectionable. No doubt, he can reprimand students, but not in such a language which would shatter the tender mind. As per the statements of witnesses, the applicant has scolded the deceased minor boy in an unruly manner…Prima facie it suggests that the applicant has created an impression in the mind of the student to put him in deep frustration.”

The judge held: “It requires to be noted that there is a direct link of the applicant’s act since within (a) few hours from the episode, the child has ended his life by suicide…A young student has lost his life in proximity from the act of the applicant. Investigation is in progress. The applicant’s custodial interrogation is necessary. No case is made out to grant pre-arrest protection, hence, the application stands rejected.”