HC upholds jail for teacher in sexual assault of student
TIMES NEWS NETWORK
Chennai: 29.06.2018
A science teacher who was sentenced to 10 years imprisonment after being found guilty of sexually assaulting a 11-year-old girl student, failed to earn any relief from the Madras high court, which upheld the sentence.
Justice R M T Teeka Raman, declining to offer any relief to Sivanesan, said: “The petitioner/accused, is a teacher is handling children. His duty is not only to impart education, but to also preach moral and ethical principles to them. A teacher should be a role-model to the students.”
Sivanesan had sexually assaulted the girl at a school near Tirunallar, in Puducherry, on August 4, 2016. A case under Pocso Act was registered following her parents’ complaint. The prosecution had paraded 17 witnesses to prove the accused guilty, and a trial court sentenced him to 10 years in jail, besides imposing a fine of ₹5,000. Assailing the order, he filed the present appeal.
The judge pointed out that the witnesses had “given cogent, unblemished and corroborating evidence about the act of the accused. “Considering the entirety of the circumstances and the evidence placed, I am not inclined to grant the relief for the present.”
TIMES NEWS NETWORK
Chennai: 29.06.2018
A science teacher who was sentenced to 10 years imprisonment after being found guilty of sexually assaulting a 11-year-old girl student, failed to earn any relief from the Madras high court, which upheld the sentence.
Justice R M T Teeka Raman, declining to offer any relief to Sivanesan, said: “The petitioner/accused, is a teacher is handling children. His duty is not only to impart education, but to also preach moral and ethical principles to them. A teacher should be a role-model to the students.”
Sivanesan had sexually assaulted the girl at a school near Tirunallar, in Puducherry, on August 4, 2016. A case under Pocso Act was registered following her parents’ complaint. The prosecution had paraded 17 witnesses to prove the accused guilty, and a trial court sentenced him to 10 years in jail, besides imposing a fine of ₹5,000. Assailing the order, he filed the present appeal.
The judge pointed out that the witnesses had “given cogent, unblemished and corroborating evidence about the act of the accused. “Considering the entirety of the circumstances and the evidence placed, I am not inclined to grant the relief for the present.”
No comments:
Post a Comment