Headmaster is guardian of school, responsible for reporting POCSO case, says Madras HC, dismisses plea to quash trial

CHENNAI: Terming a headmaster as the guardian of an entire school, the Madras High Court refused to quash the pending criminal case booked under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Pocso) Act and directed the State to submit the action taken report.

As the headmaster is the guard of the school, he should inform, if any incident covered under Pocso Act has taken place against a student of the school, the court observed. The head of the school has to either intimate the officials concerned, the district child protection officer or the police, but in the present case, the petitioner failed to do any of it, the court slammed.

Thus, the headmaster has derelicted from his duty, held Justice P Velmurugan while dismissing the petition.

The petitioner, who was booked as a third accused in a Pocso Act case by the prosecution which the special court at Coimbatore took cognisance, moved the petition seeking to quash the trial pending against him.

The petitioner contended that despite him being the headmaster of the school when the accused persons sexually abused a girl student, he didn't have any role in the offence and sought to quash the case.

Additional public prosecutor S Sugendran submitted that based on the further information secured by the prosecution, the petitioner was impleaded as the third accused under Section 21 (2) of the Pocso Act for not reporting the crime.

In 2018, when the victim girl was studying class 8 in the petitioner's school, two accused persons sexually abused her. Since the petitioner failed to report the offence, the case was booked against the accused persons after three years and the petitioner was the third accused.

The judge held that there is a prima facie allegation against the petitioner, so he is not inclined to quash the charge sheet filed against him.

Further, the court directed the police to submit a report on the action taken against the petitioner, including a recommendation to the education department to initiate departmental proceedings or any other action against the petitioner.

The matter was posted on December 16 for compliance with the court order.