Sign Language Testimonies Pave Way for Justice in Harrowing School Assault Case
A Mumbai court has delivered a significant conviction, finding a former school principal and a teacher guilty of sexually assaulting and harassing minor girls who are speech and hearing impaired. The landmark ruling, delivered on December 20, 2025, hinged critically on the recorded testimonies of the victims, which were meticulously interpreted by experts in sign language.
The Crucial Role of Expert Interpretation
The court explicitly acknowledged the pivotal role played by expert interpreters in the legal process. The evidence of the complainant was recorded with their assistance, particularly in situations where the victim could not comprehend questions posed by the prosecutor. The court firmly stated, "There is no dispute about the correct translation and interpretation made by expert interpreters in recording of evidence." Initial statements from the informant were also video-recorded to ensure accuracy.
One of the victims, a 13-year-old girl, detailed in her complaint that the accused would call girls to his office and misbehave with them. The abuse reportedly began soon after she joined the school.
Court Rejects Defence Claims, Upholds Victim Credibility
The defence lawyers for the accused argued that the testimonies of three victims were "vague and not reliable" because they did not provide exact dates for the alleged incidents. However, the court dismissed this argument, offering a powerful rationale for the victims' testimony.
The bench noted, "Despite the difficulties, the victim has given minute details of the instances of molestation by the two accused. When the instances were recurring, maybe with some intervals, for the period of more than two years, it is obviously difficult for the victims to remember either date or exact period."
Emphasizing the consistency and lack of motive for false allegations, the court added, "The court cannot expect evidence of the victim with such a precision, especially when she is a special child. What is important to note here is that victim had no reason to make false allegations... The sequence of evidence given by her are consistent to the case of prosecution."
School's Sign Language Use Confirmed Despite Syllabus Dispute
During the trial, a teacher and the managing trustee of the school, who appeared as defence witnesses, claimed that sign language was not part of the school's formal syllabus. They stated that education was provided through the oral aural method and that a 2013 proposal to introduce sign language was not approved at the time.
However, the court's careful examination revealed a different reality. It was established that although sign language was not formally taught, it was routinely used by teachers and students for convenience. Most decisively, the statements of the victims and other students were recorded by the Investigating Officer with the help of sign language experts, solidifying the validity of the evidence presented.
This case sets a vital precedent for the Indian judiciary, underscoring the importance of accessible communication and expert interpretation in delivering justice for specially-abled victims, ensuring their voices are heard and believed in a court of law.
