The Delhi High Court has discharged Rekha Kakkar, a government school principal, from allegations of negligence in connection with the tragic death of a student in 2016 at a school in the Kapashera area. The decision came after the court found procedural lapses in the prosecution’s case.
The incident involved the drowning of a four-year-old student in a septic tank, for which an FIR under Section 304A (causing death by negligence) and Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) was filed against Kakkar, a junior engineer (JE), a contractor, and a school maid. Despite the serious allegations, the court ruled in Kakkar’s favor, citing a legal technicality.
Key Legal Issue
Justice Neena Bansal Krishna noted that the prosecution had failed to obtain the mandatory sanction for prosecution before filing the charge sheet against Kakkar. “It is settled law that the sanction had to be obtained prior to taking cognizance. Subsequent sanctions would not cure the initial defect in cognizance,” the judge stated in her order dated January 17. As a result, the court discharged Kakkar and allowed the prosecution to take appropriate legal action if necessary.
The charge sheet in the case was filed on July 5, 2016, and the magistrate court subsequently took cognizance of the case without the required sanction. Although the prosecution later obtained the sanction and submitted it to the court, the High Court ruled that this could not retroactively validate the cognizance.
Defense Argument
Advocate Dhruv Gupta, representing Kakkar, argued that the cognizance taken by the magistrate was fundamentally flawed due to the absence of prior sanction. He emphasized that any subsequent sanction would not rectify this defect. Gupta also submitted that if a fresh charge sheet were filed, it should be accompanied by an application for condonation of delay.
Prosecution’s Stand
The Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) acknowledged that the sanction was obtained only after the cognizance had been taken, which was contrary to legal requirements. The High Court stated that any application for condonation of delay, if filed, could be considered in accordance with the law.
Trial to Continue for Other Accused
While discharging Kakkar, the court clarified that the trial against the other accused individuals in the case, including the JE, contractor, and school maid, would continue.
This ruling underscores the importance of adhering to procedural requirements in criminal cases. The court’s decision grants relief to Kakkar but leaves the door open for fresh proceedings if conducted in accordance with the law.
Read More: Parakram Diwas: What Is It And Why Does India Celebrate It On January 23?