'No Mens Rea': Kerala HC Grants Pre-Arrest Bail To Headmistress Booked Under SC/ST Act For Cutting Tribal Student's Hair During Assembly

Justice K Babu observed that there was no mens rea established against the appellant-headmistress and that she was only trying to enforce disciplinary control over the victim and at most "exceeded in the corporal punishment". Further, it stated that the alleged acts would not attract offences under the SC/ST (PoA) Act.

“On an analysis of the facts placed before this Court, I am of the view that the mens rea of the appellant in the commission of the alleged acts is doubtful. At the most, it could be seen that the appellant being a school teacher having disciplinary control over the victim exceeded in the corporal punishment on the victim. Therefore, I am of the view that there is no prima facie material to attract the offences under the SC/ST (PoA) Act.”

The appellant, a headmistress of a school has approached the Court against an order of the Sessions Court by which her anticipatory bail application was dismissed.

A crime was registered against the appellant under Sections 341 (punishment for wrongful restraint) of IPC, Sections 3 (punishment for offences of atrocities) of the SC/ST (PoA) Act and Section 75 (punishment for cruelty to child) of JJ Act.

The Sessions Court had found that there was no prime facie case to establish an offence under the SC/ST (PoA) Act, however, it dismissed the anticipatory bail application on finding an offence proved under the JJ Act.

The counsel for the appellant denied all the allegations and submitted that she had not done any act intentionally which was derogatory to the dignity of the victim. It was also argued that being a headmistress, she was only trying to enforce discipline in the school for the betterment and welfare of the victim. It was submitted that a false complaint was filed based on extraneous reasons.

On the other hand, the counsel for the victim submitted that the act of the appellant was against human dignity and attracted offences under the SC/ST (PoA) Act. It was also argued that the victim and her family suffered mental frustration after the incident.

The statement of the victim read thus: 'Teacher knew that I belong to Malavettuva Community. Teacher forcefully cut my hair while I was attending morning school assembly with intent to insult me.' On perusing the statement, the Court found that the FIR was lodged after a delay of ten days and that there was evidence showing that the appellant was concerned about the welfare of the children. It also took note of the fact that the Sessions Court had found that there was no mens rea.

The Court also expressed doubt as to whether there was any intention to act with cruelty against the child for attracting an offence under Section 75 of the JJ Act.

Additionally, the Court stated that the appellant was not absconding and that there was no case that she was tampering with the evidence or investigation.

On the above findings, the Court held that the appellant was entitled to anticipatory bail.

Counsel for the appellant: Advocates S Rajeev, V Vinay, M S Aneer, Prerith Philip Joseph, Anilkumar C R, K S Kiran Krishnan

Counsel for the respondents: Advocate P K Santhamma, Public Prosecutor G Sudheer

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 61

Case title: SJ v State of Kerala

Case number: CRL.A NO. 1752 OF 2023

Click Here To Read/Download The Judgment