MUMBAI: As proceedings before the Maharashtra State Commission for Protection of Child Rights (MSCPCR) continue, the complainant in a Pocso case has challenged the findings of a departmental inquiry that exonerated a lab assistant at a Chembur school accused of sexually assaulting her during a school picnic in November 2022. She has alleged that despite the pendency of criminal proceedings, the employee has once again been allowed to resume duty.
An FIR was registered at Neral police station in September 2024 under provisions of the Pocso Act and the then Indian Penal Code. The accused subsequently secured anticipatory bail from a Sessions Court in Panvel.
The school had initially suspended the lab assistant after the FIR was lodged, but reinstated him in January 2025, allegedly citing the grant of pre-arrest bail and repeated representations made by the employee. Following media reports and intervention by education authorities, he was suspended again. The complainant now claims that after a departmental inquiry gave him a clean chit, he has once more resumed duties.
Questioning the fairness of the inquiry, the complainant alleged that the panel comprised only male members despite the case involving allegations of sexual misconduct by a girl student. She further claimed the proceedings were conducted in haste and that neither she nor her witnesses were given an opportunity to physically verify and sign their statements. According to her, portions of the statements later emailed to them did not accurately reflect what had been recorded.
She also alleged that the committee failed to adequately consider evidence and testimony produced by her, including statements from a former teacher and a former student who had served as the school’s Head Boy. According to her, both witnesses had previously raised concerns regarding the lab assistant’s conduct towards girl students.
“My concern is that the inquiry was neither fair nor impartial,” she told Hindustan Times. “Despite the pendency of criminal proceedings, the school conducted a departmental inquiry. The inquiry committee ultimately exonerated the lab assistant on the ground that there was insufficient evidence. This was despite my producing evidence and witnesses in support of my complaint,” she said.
Meanwhile, the MSCPCR is separately examining the matter. The commission had taken cognisance of the lab assistant’s reinstatement following media reports and sought responses from the school and education authorities. Proceedings before the child rights body remain underway.
MSCPCR chairman Sanjay Puranik said the matter is currently being heard and that the commission will consider the documents, witness evidence and inquiry report before making its recommendations.
The inquiry committee, constituted under the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977, submitted its report on May 27. After examining the complainant, the accused employee, the principal, teachers and other witnesses, it concluded that the charges had “not been established due to lack of sufficient evidence” and exonerated the lab assistant.
The report noted that criminal proceedings arising from the same allegations are pending before the Sessions Court in Panvel and clarified that the court’s eventual verdict would prevail over the committee’s findings.
The committee also examined evidence produced by the complainant’s witnesses, including a former head boy who submitted a video and alleged that the lab assistant was frequently seen near the girls’ toilets. According to the report, the witness admitted during examination that the footage had been recorded near another area of the campus and not outside the girls’ toilets. The committee consequently held that the recording did not substantiate the allegation. The complainant, however, disputes the committee’s assessment and maintains that relevant material and witness testimony were not adequately considered.
Confirming that the lab assistant had been reinstated, the school principal said his service status had been decided in accordance with the inquiry committee’s findings and defended the process, stating that the panel functioned independently of the school management.
“The inquiry was conducted by an Inquiry Committee constituted under the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977, pursuant to permission granted by the Education Department. The school itself did not conduct any independent inquiry; the proceedings were conducted exclusively by the duly constituted Inquiry Committee,” she said.
According to the principal, the committee was constituted after the employee was placed under suspension in March 2025, and the Education Department subsequently granted an extension after the school informed authorities that the proceedings could not be completed within the prescribed period.
The principal, however, did not respond to HT’s query on whether the school could have waited for the MSCPCR’s report before reinstating the employee, particularly as proceedings before the commission and the criminal case before a Panvel court remain pending.
