Srinagar: A court in Baramulla has granted bail to a government lecturer arrested in a high-profile POCSO case that triggered massive student protests in Sopore last month, observing that despite recording statements of 77 witnesses, including 75 minor girl students, investigators were unable to identify any victim who alleged sexual harassment by the accused.
In a bail order passed on May 12, Principal Sessions Judge Baramulla Jawad Ahmad said the material collected during nearly a month-long investigation did not disclose any “direct incriminating accusation” against lecturer Ghulam Hassan Mir, who was arrested on April 13 following allegations of inappropriate conduct at Government Girls Higher Secondary School, Sopore.
The case had snowballed into a major law-and-order issue after protests by students spilled onto the streets of Sopore, leading to clashes, closure of educational institutions and the detention of six youths under the Public Safety Act (PSA).
Ghulam Hassan Mir, a senior Urdu lecturer who had been posted at the girls’ higher secondary school for several years, was booked under Section 75 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 9 and 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act after the school administration informed police that students had alleged harassment of a Class 9 student inside the campus.
According to the bail order, the FIR was registered after a group of girl students approached the school administration on April 13 last month alleging that a teacher had “sexually harassed/inappropriately touched” a student.
However, while examining the case diary during bail proceedings, the court noted that none of the 75 minor students whose statements were recorded had made any direct allegation against the lecturer.
“Every minor student, in substance, has stated that she merely heard that the accused/applicant has touched some girl student,” the court observed. “None among such minor girl students… has identified herself as the victim nor any such minor girl student witness has named any particular victim.”
The court further recorded that the Class 11 student who allegedly led the group of students to the vice principal had also not claimed to have witnessed any incident herself and had only said she “heard about the incident.”
Significantly, the court referred to the statement of a Class 9 student who was reportedly unwell on the day of the incident and whose statement was recorded under Section 183 BNSS.
“She has stated that nothing has happened with her,” the order noted, adding that the student told investigators the lecturer had “never committed any wrongful act or inappropriately behaved with her.”
In one of the most striking observations in the order, the court recorded the investigating officer’s submission made during the hearing.
“The IO of the case present in the court, frankly conceded at bar that whatever investigation he has conducted in this case for last one month, in such investigation he has not been able to find out the actual victim who may have been allegedly sexually harassed by the accused/applicant in any manner,” the court said.
While acknowledging that allegations involving children are “grave” and require courts to act with “utmost sensitivity,” the court cautioned against curtailing liberty solely on the basis of public sentiment or unverified allegations.
“Liberty of an individual cannot be curtailed merely on the basis of suspicion, conjecture or circulating allegations unsupported by direct material,” the court observed.
The order further said that the courts “cannot afford to be influenced by emotions, public sentiment or moral outrage alone” and must remain guided by “evidence and constitutional principles rather than by emotional currents surrounding an accusation.”
The court said continued detention of the lecturer “solely on the basis of generalized suspicion” would not be consistent with settled principles of personal liberty and that bail could not be withheld “as a measure of societal anger.”
Granting bail, the court directed lecturer’s release on a bond of ₹50,000 with one surety and imposed conditions restraining him from visiting the school, contacting students or influencing witnesses during the investigation.
The court, however, clarified that the order “shall not dilute the seriousness with which the allegations concerning children are to be viewed” and directed the investigating agency to continue the probe “fairly and effectively.”
The allegations against the lecturer had sparked widespread protests in Sopore on April 13, with students taking to the streets demanding action. Authorities later shut several educational institutions in the area amid escalating tensions.
In the aftermath of the protests, police detained several persons and later booked six youths under the PSA, accusing them of vandalism and disturbing public order during the demonstrations.
Those detained under PSA were identified by police as Umar Akbar Hajam, Salman Ahmed Shala, Altaf Ahmed Sheikh, Mubashir Ahmed Gilkar, Muzammil Mushtaq Changa and Majid Firdous Dar, all residents of Sopore. Police said they were shifted to District Jail Bhadarwah after detention warrants were issued by the competent authority. (KDC)
