Bengaluru CSI Church Girls School, Girls Molested by Management, POCSO CASE SLAPPED AGAINST MANAGEMENT

 POCSO CASE SLAPPED AGAINST MANAGEMENT OF LEADING GIRLS’ SCHOOL OVER ‘SEXUAL ASSAULT’

By Prakruti PK, Bangalore Mirror Bureau | Jan 12, 2015, 04.00 AM IST

http://www.bangaloremirror.com/bangalore/cover-story/POCSO-case-slapped-against-management-of-leading-girls-school-over-sexual-assault/articleshow/45846556.cms

In what may be described as an appalling first for a prestigious all-girls' private school located in the heart of the city, the Central division police have registered a complaint under various sections of the POCSO Act along with section 354 (a) of the IPC against three members of the school management for allegedly manhandling and sexually assaulting students who were staging a protest on the school's premises, on Thursday morning. The protest was against the installation of a new principal.

Highly-placed police sources confirmed that a former teacher and member of the Church of South India, Karnataka Central Diocese, approached the Cubbon Park police on Saturday and filed an FIR against three members of the school management claiming they used foul language to abuse the girls, reportedly threatened to hurt them, and allegedly sexually assaulted them in a bid to get the protestors to disperse and return to their classrooms.

A senior police officer told Mirror, "We received a letter from the school on Wednesday saying they were anticipating some sort of trouble due to the announcement that the temporary principal was being replaced by a new one. They requested us to be present near the school the next morning, and accordingly, we reached the premises by 7.30 am on Thursday, but were asked to stay outside." A large number of students belonging to classes VIII, IX, X, and XI were reportedly seated on the ground just inside the school entrance, and some were holding up banners declaring their solidarity with the outgoing principal.

The fracas is thought to have unfolded between 9.15 and 9.45 am, when the new principal arrived flanked by two men - purportedly both members of management - but was not 'allowed' to enter the premises by the girls.

"The complainant told us that she is a former teacher and a member of the diocese. She claims she was passing by the school when she noticed the commotion and stopped. She has alleged that the members of the management manhandled, criminally intimidated, and sexually assaulted several of the girls at the protest. She told us the men used vulgar and offensive language, spat on the girls, and even slapped one of them. She also claims in her plaint that the girls were molested when the men tried snatching the badges pinned to the students' chests," the police officer added.

The Cubbon Park police were reportedly specifically requested to stay outside the school premises and were told the matter was 'internal'; so maintain they were unable to see whether or not any assault had taken place.

A case was immediately registered under sections 354 (a) (sexual harassment by physical contact and advances involving unwelcome and explicit sexual overtures), 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace), and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the IPC; along with sections 8, 9(f), and 10 of the POCSO Act.

CCTV footage from the cameras mounted on the school gates and inside the premises is also being scrutinized by the police. Since the incident took place during the day and the resolution of the CCTVs is high, officials are confident of being able to use the video footage as valuable evidence.

Meanwhile, given the sensitive nature of the issue, officers in plain-clothes will have to visit the school and question the faculty and students who were present at the protest about the allegations in the complaint. When contacted, deputy commissioner of police (Central) Sandeep Patil confirmed that a complaint had been registered and said a full-fledged investigation was under way. The chairman of the school stated that the protest on Thursday was masterminded by a couple of teachers as they had an issue with the new principal taking over.

"They instigated a few teachers by convincing them that a teacher of the school should be made the principal and not someone from outside," he had said.

Why we can't mention the school by name

For those wondering why the school's name has been withheld in this report by Bangalore Mirror, this is to clarify that it is in view of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. Under this Act, no detail that jeopardises the privacy and identity of the victim — this includes the name of the school — can and should be revealed by anyone, the media included. Keeping in mind the child's well-being, especially in the current scenario, BM has thus omitted the name or any detail related in all its reportage. We would sincerely appreciate if our readers would do the same in the comments section of this page and on social media. 

An Open Letter to Bishop Cotton Girls’ School

By Malavika Prasad Alumna

Published: 19th January 2015 06:00 AM

Last Updated: 19th January 2015 01:29 AM

On http://www.newindianexpress.com/cities/bengaluru/An-Open-Letter-to-Bishop-Cotton-Girls%E2%80%99-School/2015/01/19/article2625086.ece

January 8, your students engaged in a protest against a change of Principal, during which, it was reported, some children were “roughed up” and “verbally abused”. However, your children tell a more worrying story: A man arrived during the protest, accompanied by two others. After a heated conversation with some teachers, he began screaming at the students to disperse. He allegedly made threats of violence, slapped a student, took photographs of some others, and even punched your private eye. Faced with continued defiance, he allegedly shoved a student, before launching into an expletive-filled tirade against them.

If reports on the incident are anything to go by, an official from the school management stated on the same day that no child was assaulted. This statement did not follow any investigation, you will note. Your students, on the other hand, have coherent and detailed narratives of the profanity and physical abuse they suffered. They would be expelled, and would have to go begging to him for their seats, they were told. Worse still, they would be barred from their board examinations. He allegedly even threatened to shoot every single one of them if they didn’t “get the f*** out” of there. I want to believe this did not happen, but I cannot fathom why the students would fabricate such accounts either.

Ten days have passed. You have the resources to clarify what exactly happened, and at whose hands. If you are reluctant to act on the word of several children, surely CCTV footage presents a credible basis for action. Yet, no investigation is forthcoming.

 Let us assume in your favour that you needed time. Your silence, however, speaks volumes. You, as the school administration, cannot deny the events without conducting an investigation. I, as a lawyer, know all too well the importance of the presumption of innocence. But in absence of even a statement on your proposed course of action, one can only presume that your students were “roughed up” and “verbally abused”. Through your silence, you appear to implicitly condone a brazen display of power by someone in the management, and his terrorising threats of murder and violence. Worse, you appear to be acquiescing in a powerful man’s diktat that students will have to pay with their academic prospects for daring to stand up to his authority. Your silence then is your complicity.

I can see why you, as the school administration, chose silence. You are arguably constrained, because you cannot take on those in power above you. But is it not patently obvious that your students are even more constrained? Speaking out could potentially cost them their seats at your prestigious 150-year-old institution.

A parent, naturally, would want anything but a battle with a school that can, at the first sign of strife, turn so lawless that figures in authority threaten to shoot their children with impunity.

Only 10 days later, the furore has been long dead and life has gone on. Was there anyone who tried to hear the children, instead of reprimand them for their behaviour?

Was there someone who talked to them about what had just happened, before talking at them for impeding the Principal’s arrival? And what of the child who was allegedly slapped? Was there a counsellor, or a sexual harassment committee? Are you comfortable rendering your children so thoroughly voiceless? Have they been mollified, or are they terrified?  Of course, as a girls’ school, some sensitivity to the rights of women would have been welcome.

While the country screams itself hoarse with outrage against ‘rape culture’, you choose to smother the voices of young women against a gendered display of power.

Are you teaching your girls, the women of tomorrow, to swallow their experiences of violence and harassment so as not to jeopardise their academic prospects?

Come what may, no child should ever have to hear that someone significant and powerful in her school contemplates her murder. And this is the only reason I write.

I am not concerned with the change in administration; I do not have a view on who ought to be the Principal.

I am only concerned with how you treat our children when in school.

School ought to remain every child’s sanctuary.

Whatever may be the internal political upheavals in the management, institutions retain continuity. And the institution that is Bishop Cotton Girls’ School ought to have a stance on the alleged incidents of that day.

If these events happened as we hear them from your children, you ought to condemn such violence and violations. A fair investigation must follow; action must be taken.

Violence and criminal intimidation are bad enough. Let’s not add impunity to the unholy mix of (y)our issues.