Headmistress Given Bail In Kerala School Haircut Case: What Happened?

The Kerala High Court recently granted anticipatory bail to a school headmistress accused of forcefully cutting the hair of a 5th-grade student belonging to the Scheduled Tribe (ST) community during a school assembly. Justice K Babu raised doubts about whether the teacher had the intention to insult the student or violate the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act).

Bail Granted: Haircut Controversy

Justice K Babu expressed uncertainty about the teacher's guilty intent (Mens Rea) in committing the alleged acts. He suggested that, at most, it appeared the teacher, with disciplinary authority over the student, may have exceeded in corporal punishment. Consequently, the judge believed there was insufficient evidence to support charges under the SC/ST Act, leading to the approval of the teacher's anticipatory bail.

Initially, a sessions court in Kasaragod had rejected the teacher's anticipatory bail plea, prompting her to seek relief from the High Court. The accused, serving as the headmistress of Kottamala MGM UP School, faced charges under the SC/ST Act after an 11-year-old student claimed she had cut his hair during a school assembly, resulting in mockery from other students. The victim asserted that the teacher was aware of his ST community background.

The incident reportedly made the victim and his sister reluctant to attend school. The accused teacher's defence emphasized that she enforced discipline for the child's growth and development. She even visited the child's home to encourage him and his sister to return to school when they were absent for a few days. The teacher's counsel argued that a false case was filed against her due to rivalries between aided schools.

The High Court granted anticipatory bail, noting the lack of support for the allegations from the accused teacher's colleagues. The headmistress, represented by advocates S Rajeev, V Vinay, MS Aneer, Prerith Philip Joseph, Anilkumar CR, and KS Kiran Krishnan, succeeded in her plea. On the other side, the State and other respondents, including the victim, were represented by advocate PK Santhamma and Public Prosecutor G Sudheer.