Good morning Message or Stalking? SC refuses to quash FIR against Medical College faculty accused of Stalking, Forging Marksheet of female student

New Delhi: Denying relief to a faculty at a Medical College in Rajasthan, who had been accused of stalking and forgery, the Supreme Court bench has recently refused to quash the FIR against him.

The concerned doctor had allegedly sent a medical student her photo along with a good-morning message on WhatsApp and also allegedly failed the student in the practical viva exam by altering her marks. Consequently, the doctor had been booked under sections 354-D, 467 468, 471, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code.

While considering the Special Leave Petition by the faculty, who challenged the Rajasthan High Court order refusing to quash the FIR, the Vacation Bench comprising Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Justice P.S. Narasimha denied any relief and observed, "We are not inclined to interfere with the order impugned. The special leave petition is dismissed. Pending application stands disposed of."

"However, it is open to the petitioner to raise all the objections as available to him at the appropriate stage," the Apex Court bench further noted.

Also Read: Pune doctor arrested for sexually harassing woman patient at clinic

As per the latest media report by Verdictum, challenging the High Court order, the doctor filed the SLP before the Apex Court bench and claimed that the complainant student had filed the FIR as an act of vengeance. He claimed that the complainant tried to incriminate the petitioner because he inquired and warned the complainant of her illegal acts of ragging on the university premises.

Referring to the allegation of failing the student in the viva examination, the doctor contended that the complainant perceived her failure to be the petitioner's fault.

It was submitted by the doctor that the petitioner student filed the complaint before the Sexual Harassment Committee and later in a fir of vengeance, filed the concerned FIR. Further, it was contended by the petitioner doctor that the High Court had failed to appreciate the fact that the FIR did not disclose any cognizable offence and also the fact that the offences registered under the FIR did not have any rhyme or reason.

Addressing the allegations of stalking, the SLP filed by the faculty stated,"The complainant has stated in the FIR that the accused used to click my pictures in class and send photographs as well as messages on WhatsApp, where in reality the Petitioner/accused has only sent one photo to the complaint, and that too was a class group photo. With regards to the message, it was a mere good morning text that was sent to all the students in general from their teacher and had nothing to do in particular with the complainant."

The counsel for the petitioner submitted that a five-member committee report has absolved the petitioner and submitted, "There is a five-member committee report which absolves him. There was no subsequent report, I verified it, there was a three-member committee report earlier in point of time that recommended a constitution of the five-member committee which in fact absolved me."

At this outset, the top court bench asked, "Was he supposed to send messages along with photographs". The counsel then replied that it was a good morning message sent along with a group photo. Advocate further added that "Because of the FIR, I was suspended and subsequently transferred. But the POSH committee, the administrative committee of 5 members found in my favour emphatically. A good morning message to a student cannot be considered stalking."

Holding that it is not a case for quashing, the bench observed, "The investigating authority is to look into what is required and what is not required. So it is not a case for quashing. You have all the liberties to raise all the objections at all the stages."

Responding to the observation of the court, the counsel for the petitioner doctor submitted, "I am still in service but with this FIR, my career will be over. This FIR will be there all the time over me. Kindly see the motivation for lodging this complaint. It is a harsh case."

"Good morning to my student in the exam centre. Kindly see the definition of stalking. The only allegation is that this Good Morning constitutes stalking and rough sheet correction is a forgery. These are the only 2 offences. He corrects a student and somebody registers a FIR," he further submitted.

Previously while considering the matter, the HC bench had noted that according to the statement of the 20-year-old complainant, she specifically named the petitioner doctor. Further, the HC bench had observed that the FIR as well as the statements pointed out that the ingredients of an offence under Section 354-D IPC were very much present.

Noting that the statement of independent witnesses was in favour of the complainant, the bench had ordered,

"Further, the committee constituted by the College upon a complaint made by the complainant, also found the petitioner guilty and suspended the petitioner from the college, Furthermore, when the petitioner was not succeeded in his bad intention, he failed the complainant in the examination by manipulation in the marks and in an inquiry, it was also found proved that the petitioner by manipulation, gave 25 in place of 32 marks in practical exam and 15 marks in place of 18 marks in viva exam. The petitioner was also stalking the complainant."

Also Read: Supreme Court dismisses plea challenging disinvestment process of HLL Lifecare