Sunday, 16 January, 2022
HomeDelhiAllegations ‘too vague’: Delhi school vice principal discharged in SC/ST case

Allegations ‘too vague’: Delhi school vice principal discharged in SC/ST case

A Delhi court docket on Monday discharged the vice principal of a personal faculty primarily based in Delhi Cantt for allegedly making casteist remarks towards an worker of the college noting that the complainant did not reveal that there was an intentional insult with an intent to humiliate the sufferer at a spot inside public view.

Extra Periods Choose Dharmender Rana discharged the accused, who’s a lady, below sections of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act noting that the investigating officer of the case tried to “refill the lacunae” within the case by submitting a supplementary chargesheet.

“In my thought-about opinion, with a view to invoke part 3 (1) (r) of SC/CT (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, the criticism ought to naked minimal reveal that there was intentional insult or intimidation by an individual, who shouldn’t be a member of SC or ST neighborhood and the insult have to be with an intent to humiliate the sufferer at a spot inside public view,” court docket mentioned.

The complainant, who can also be a lady staffer on the faculty, alleged that she was subjected to harassment and atrocities by the accused on account of her caste. Although the criticism was filed on December 1, 2018, the police had registered an FIR after a four-month delay.

The prosecution had additionally relied on a number of faculty staff, who had been witnesses on this case.

The defence counsel had forcefully argued that as a result of “strain of SC/ST Fee, the police has filed the cost­sheet, which is results of botched up investigation.”

They argued that the “alleged criticism is in truth cooked up on the behest of delinquent and indisciplined staff because the accused herein, being the Head of the Establishment, has tried to chastise the indisciplined staff.”

They submitted that the “criticism in itself is a motivated doc as disciplinary proceedings had been initiated towards the eyewitnesses and the complainant for his or her conduct on the occasion of the accused.” The accused was exonerated in departmental proceedings, the defence counsel mentioned.

Extra Public Prosecutor Irfan Ahmad argued that the “complainant has alleged that she was repeatedly harassed by the accused within the month of October 2018 in entrance of her workplace and in class floor.”

Ahmad particularly identified that the complainant has alleged that the accused used particular caste-related phrases to humiliate the complainant in full public gaze.

Nevertheless, the court docket famous that the allegations levelled towards the accused by the complainant are “too common, obscure and omnibus.”

It additionally famous that the criticism fails to specify the precise date, time, place and omits to disclose the specifics of the alleged offence.

“It merely makes a common allegation that for previous two years, complainant has been harassed by the accused utilizing caste-related phrases towards her. It neither mentions the particular phrases which offended her nor she mentions that when and the place the accused used these phrases and in whose presence, she was deliberately humiliated by the accused,” the court docket famous.

On the police investigation, the court docket famous, “The following endeavour by the Investigating Officer to refill the lacunae by recording supplementary assertion of the sufferer or different individuals to refill the gaps, wouldn’t remedy the incurable defect within the preliminary criticism, which is an embryonic doc.

Most Popular

English English हिन्दी हिन्दी ਪੰਜਾਬੀ ਪੰਜਾਬੀ