HC Issues Violation Notice for Failure to Report to Indore Police Commissioner

In a case involving a government school teacher allegedly forcing underage girls to remove their clothes to search for a mobile phone, the Indore bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court issued a show-cause notice to the city Police Commissioner explaining why contempt proceedings should not be filed. Action will be taken against him for disobeying the order.

A dividing bench Chief Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari In his order dated 13 November, he requested the Commissioner to appear in person on the next hearing date.

The court had earlier directed the state government to submit a comprehensive report on the action taken after the complaint was lodged. As a result, the FIR was registered under Article 76 (Assault or use of criminal force on woman with intent to undress her) and Article 79 (Word, gesture or action intended to insult the modesty of a woman) and Article 75 of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita ( Juvenile Justice Punishment for cruelty to child Act 2015.

On August 30, the court had directed the Commissioner of Police, Indore, to examine the matter in terms of the POCSO Act and submit a report to the Registry within a month; but the petitioner alleged that this was not done.

“A show-cause notice should be issued to the Commissioner of Police, Indore, as to why a defamation case cannot be filed against him for not complying with the said order dated 30.08.2024.. “An affidavit to this effect shall be submitted within a week and the Commissioner of Police, Indore, shall be directed to appear personally before this Court on the next date of hearing.” the court directed.

The order was passed in a PIL filed by social activist Chinmay Mishra, who brought to light the incident in which a teacher allegedly subjected five female students to a search under the garb of finding a ringing mobile phone. The complaint stated that the teacher took off their clothes and physically assaulted them.

The petitioner raised concerns that the provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses (POCSO) Act, 2012 were not properly considered by the police. The petitioner highlighted this limitation and referred to the bench’s earlier direction on August 30, in which the court had ordered the Indore Police Commissioner to look into the matter under the POCSO Act and submit a report.

The petitioner has also submitted draft guidelines in the matter and sought to place the same on record. The court listed the matter on November 25, directing the Registry to register the same.

Case title: CHINMAY MISHRA VS MADHYA PRADESH CASE AND OTHERS

Quote: WP No. 23250, 2024

Click Here to Read/Download the Order