Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 920 (JHR)

Court on its own Motion. v. .

2011-09-22

P.P.BHATT, PRAKASH TATIA

body2011
JUDGMENT: Heard learned Amicus Curiae and the learned Standing counsel appearing for the State. 2. After order dated 14.09.2011 in the matter of problem of eve-teasing, the State Administration convened the meeting and invited the Principals of various schools from Ranchi city. The minutes of the meeting are placed on record as Annexure-A alongwith the affidavit. It appears from the minutes of the meeting that all the Principals of the schools in unequivocal language stated before the State Administration that the problem is grave. 3. We registered this Public Interest Litigation assuming that the problem will be grave but after going through this report, we are of the view that we underestimated the problem and the problem is more than any of our imagination with respect to eve-teasing in educational institutions and coaching classes as well as near these institutions. The Administration also admitted that problem is there which is grave and also pointed out that the problem is not near and within the campus of the educational institutions but the problem is also near all big shops centres and malls. It is very unfortunate that all Principals of the schools have raised their voice when they were called upon to discuss the issue but from the minutes we do not find that they themselves have taken some strong steps to meet with this problem which may affect the future of the young boys and girls. Even in absence of any comment recorded in the minutes from the mouth of any of the Principals of the schools we believe that in past they may have raised some voice but because of the fact that no action has been tkaen or a futile action was taken or they got more threats after reporting the matter, they did not pursue the matter further. We find from the report that after admitting that eve-teasing has broken all the barriers of the social bindings as well as family bonds to make these persons indisciplined. We find from the report that after admitting that eve-teasing has broken all the barriers of the social bindings as well as family bonds to make these persons indisciplined. In one of the schools, it has been reported that even local persons are involved in eve-teasing and to the extent that they entered into the school premises and destroyed the urinals and in another incident, Principal of one of the colleges has reported that even drug edicts are entering into the college premises and large number of miscreants are entering after taking liquor and they entered on motorcycle and the Administration is not in a position to deal with these persons. Another school further reported that the girls are not only teased but they are followed on motorcycle as well as by car when the girls are going in the school bus and by doing so, such miscreants drive the vehicle in such a way that they may cause any serious accident. 4. We have given a few instance only out of several but since all things have been taken note of in the minutes, we do not want to repeat all these things in this order. 5. After taking note of all these things, the Administration has decided to act fast and firmly and gave certain suggestions in the same meeting. Another meeting was called by the State Administration in which the Executive Officers of the Ranchi Municipal Corporation and Deputy Superintendent of Police, Kotwali, Ranchi and representative of the coaching institutes etc. were called and decision has been taken that the Identity cards be given to the students etc. 6. Learned Amicus Curiae, Mr. Dilip Jerath, took pains and after going through the report, he gave very valuable suggestions and drew our attention to the fact that in Delhi there is an Act namely “The Delhi Prohibition of Eve-teasing Act, 1988” and similar Act is also in force in the State of Tamil Nadu. Now, it is for the State of Jharkhand to look into the matter that for same problem even Acts were enacted as back as in the year 1988 and in view of the admitted case of the State as admitted in the mintues of the meeting referred above, it is right time for the State to frame a Law to meet the challenge of the eve-teasing. 7. 7. Learned Amicus Curiae also drew our attention to the fact that girls are abused with the help of unwanted E-Mails and S.M.S.and also drew our attention to one of the news indicating that because of the declaration of one boy of dumping a girl friend, the said girl who happened to be from the State of Jharkhand, has already committed suicide. 8. We again reiterate that neither the girls nor the boys nor their family members may report the incident even if they are of very serious nature and we know that it is because of the sole object to keep the honour of the girl and family in the eyes of all where the victim of eve-teasing on exposure becomes the victim of society as a discarded person and that ruins the future of not only the girl but even her own family members including her own sister, who neither have been teased nor have any role etc. but she is the sister of the girl who was teased. 9. The Court is of the view that unless such problem is addressed by the society, mere framing of the law may not serve any purpose. The problem can be resolved only when respect of the elders are regained, family bonds are reestablished, elders start discharging their duties to teach and control young. In that situation, if the elder ladies of the area are motivated to come forward to form a team and join hand with the State Administration, then this problem may be effectively cured. Such committees can be framed by the Administation by taking help of the local persons without involving the students themselves so that they may devote their time for constructive work in studies without getting a feeling of heroism by becoming a member of a team in the time of their studies. 10. We are making it clear that this is our suggestion only and not the mandate. It is for the State to examine whether this suggestion is workable or not. 11. We are forwarding the suggestions given by Senior Counsel, Mr. Dilip Jerath, learned Aminus Curiae, to the State for consideration and taking action. 10. We are making it clear that this is our suggestion only and not the mandate. It is for the State to examine whether this suggestion is workable or not. 11. We are forwarding the suggestions given by Senior Counsel, Mr. Dilip Jerath, learned Aminus Curiae, to the State for consideration and taking action. The suggestions which have already been given by the Committee may be implemented without any delay as well as the improvements may also be made in the effective manner for eradication of this shameful environment from the entire State of Jharkhand and we hope that the State of Jharkhand shall not confine this issue to the city of Ranchi only and may take steps in the cities where this problem is there without any further delay. 12. At this juncture, we may also direct the State Administration that whenever any boy or even girl is apprehended for even brief interrogation to find out what for they are there, then in that situation their identity should not be disclosed to anybody, except and if necessary, to his mother and father only and not to even such person's brother and sister so as to lower him in the eyes of his brother and sister. Bringing to the notice of the parents, is necessary for correction and therefore, this is permissible. 13. We further direct that in this effort, the State Government shall prevent self styled leaders of the society who wants to become the guardian of the young as well as the society by enterfering and taking action against the person on the allegation of involvement in eve-teasing decided by their own jugement for which neither they have expertise nor they are authorised and their action is absolutely illegal, therefore, this Court will not tolerate any report of not taking of the action againt such a self styled leaders and guardians of the society who wants to take this opportunity to serve their own purpose and take the administration in their own hands when the State is taking action. 14. 14. The State authorities are directed to ensure that in any of the event the photographs of any of such persons who alleged to have been involved in such activities should not be published and we request the State Administration to request the press / media to see that whenever and in case any such photograph is displayed in the electronic-media or print media, then face of such person should not be shown in the photograph. 15. Now the State has full record of the gravity of the issue, therefore, the State may proceed and act and we want to see the steps which may be taken by the State and the State will submit an additional affidavit to satisfy this Court how they are proceeding to meet with this big challenge. 16. Put-up on 19.10.2011. 17. Copy of this order be given to Learned Amicus Curiae, Mr. Dilip Jerath, as well as to the learned Standing counsel, Mr. R. Mukhopadhyay, appearing for the State.