The Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court has quashed criminal proceedings against the president of a private school in Maharashtra, emphasizing the importance of contemporaneous evidence in sexual harassment cases. The court noted that a six-day delay in filing the First Information Report (FIR) and the complainant's own email correspondence failed to support the allegations.
Case Background
Justice Vrushali Joshi allowed the criminal application filed by a Mumbai-based scientist, who serves as the school president in Khamgaon town, Buldhana district. The application sought to quash the FIR, chargesheet, and subsequent criminal proceedings registered at Shivajinagar police station in Khamgaon.
The case originated from a complaint lodged on July 31, 2025, by a 27-year-old teacher at the school. She alleged that the petitioner attempted to establish close intimacy with her over two months, and on July 26, 2025, he touched her inappropriately, abused her, and threatened to ruin her career after she resisted his advances.
Defense Arguments
The 52-year-old petitioner, a resident of Mumbai's Cumballa Hill, denied all allegations. His counsel, Raheel Mirza, argued that the complaint was filed only after the school administration reprimanded the teacher over discipline and teaching methods. Mirza submitted that emails exchanged between the complainant and the school's vice-principal after the alleged incident contained no reference to sexual harassment or misconduct.
Court Observations
The court noted that although the alleged incident occurred on July 26, 2025, the FIR was lodged six days later. The complainant attributed the delay to medical advice following a cat bite, but the court observed that she had continued attending school during that period.
Justice Joshi also examined email exchanges between July 26 and July 31, 2025. The court noted that the complainant referred only to being reprimanded in a loud voice and sought permission to resume duties. Per the emails, she did not mention anything about the incident.
The judgment recorded that on July 30, 2025, the complainant's brother allegedly entered the school premises and created a scene, following which the complaint was lodged the next day.
Verdict
The court ultimately held that, in the context of the delayed FIR, the email exchanges, and surrounding circumstances, no prima facie case was made out against the applicant. Consequently, the criminal proceedings were quashed.
