New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has discharged the chairman and a teacher of a private school in the national capital in the case of the death of a 12-year-old student, who while leaning over the railing on the second floor of the school building in 2012 lost his balance and accidentally fell and succumbed to his injuries.
High Court set aside trial court order framing charges against school chairman, teacher
Justice Neena Bansal Krishna set aside an October 2023 order of the trial court framing charges against the chairman and teacher of the private school accused of the charge of causing death by negligence.
Neither any negligence or recklessness can be attributed to the petitioners: High Court
The High Court, while discharging the chairman and teacher of the school accused of the charge of causing death by negligence, said, “The evidence, as collected by the IO (Investigating Officer) clearly establishes that it was a case of pure accident that the child lost his balance while balancing his school bag and fell. Neither any negligence or recklessness can be attributed to the petitioners.”
Incident occurred in January 2012
The unfortunate incident occurred on January 24, 2012 when a 12 year old student of Rishabh Public School, Mayur Vihar, Delhi accidentally fell. The child was rushed to the hospital but by then he had expired.
The FIR was registered in January 2012 and the investigations were completed and the charge sheet was filed against the chairman and the teacher in charge and on bus duty on the date of the incident.
The magistrate court framed the notice under section 304-A (causing death by negligence) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) in September 2021 and the chairman and the teacher challenged the order of the magistrate court before a sessions court, which dismissed their appeals in October 2023. Aggrieved by the order of the sessions court, they challenged it before the High Court.
What did the counsels for school chairman, teacher submit before the High Court?
While the counsel representing the chairman submitted that he cannot be held negligent for the incident in any manner, the counsel for the teacher argued that there was no incriminating evidence against her and the death of the child cannot be attributed to her.
This is a very unfortunate case, grief of parents is reasonable and justified: High Court
The High Court observed that this is a very unfortunate case where the cruel hands of fate led to the death of the child because of a fall from the second floor of the school building and the grief of the parents at the loss of their son, is reasonable and justified and their quest for justice is also understandable, however, to make the chairman and teacher liable, their culpability need to be established.
It cannot be said that the teacher was in any way directly or indirectly responsible for negligence: High Court
The High Court noted that the teacher in charge was present on the ground floor to ensure that children board the school bus safely, and awaiting the bus for taking the children back home and the child went up to his class room on the second floor for getting his notebook and the duty of the teacher was confined to the ground floor.
“Moreover, the child went on his own to collect the Notebook from his class room on the second floor. The child had been regularly doing so and class being on the second floor, is not the proximate cause of the death,” the High Court said.
The High Court further said that it was not in the duty of the teacher to ensure that no child leaves the room unattended nor was she responsible in any manner to accompany the child to the second floor.
“From the manner in which the accident happened, it cannot be said that the teacher was in any way directly or indirectly responsible for negligence or rashness of any kind,” the High Court said.
It is not a case where accident happened because of inappropriate height of parapet, for which chairman can be held negligent: HC
The High Court further said that it is not a case where the accident happened because of the inappropriate height of the parapet, for which the chairman of the school can be held negligent and no negligence in any manner can be attributed to the teacher in discharge of her duty in the fall of the child.
“The impugned order framing the notice against the petitioners under section 304-A is hereby set aside. The petitioners are hereby discharged and the bail bond and the surety bond stand discharged,” the High Court said in its order while discharging the chairman and teacher of the school.