Odisha college committee exonerates teacher accused of sexual harassment, says deceased girl's allegations are baseless
The ICC report, which came out recently, said the allegation of sexual harassment was baseless as the committee did not find any conclusive evidence to substantiate the charges.
'Students should strive to uphold reputation of institutions and improve quality of education by keeping cordial relationship with teachers and they should not indulge in character assassination without any proof,' the report said.
It said, 'Teachers should also closely study psychology of students and become compassionate in order to improve their academic growth.'
The ICC, constituted under the leadership of Jayashree Mishra following allegations of sexual harassment against Samira Kumar Sahoo — Head of the Bachelor of Education department at the college, did not recommend any punitive action in its report. The student had allegedly taken the extreme step of setting herself ablaze after her repeated complaints against the teacher went unaddressed.
Report contradictory
The ICC report contradicted the statement of several ICC members who claimed that they had recommended the removal of the accused teacher from his current position. However, the final ICC report made no mention of any transfer or removal of the teacher from the post of department head.
The girl student's family members and friends and members of the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP) — of which she was a member — alleged that even a temporary transfer or asking the accused teacher to go on leave, after her complaints, could have eased tensions and possibly prevented the tragedy. They further claimed that Sahoo influenced the outcome of the ICC inquiry by continuing in his role during the investigation.
The report claimed that the ICC conducted a five-day-long investigation and recorded the statements of the student, her father, 60 other students and college teachers.
Binaytosh Mishra, Director General of Police (Crime Branch), said there were discrepancies in the statements given by individuals connected to the case before and after the girl's death. He added that the Crime Branch, which is investigating into the incident, has gathered several key pieces of evidence and that the progress of the probe has been satisfactory.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
27 minutes ago
- Mint
Malegaon Blast verdict today after 17 years of legal proceedings; ex-MP Pragya Thakur among accused
Nearly 17 years after a deadly blast claimed six lives and left more than 100 injured in Maharashtra's communally sensitive Malegaon town, a special NIA court is expected to pronounce its verdict in the case on Thursday, July 31. The trial, which started in 2018, got over on April 19, 2025, however. the case was reserved for judgement. BJP leader and former MP Pragya Thakur and Lt Col Prasad Purohit were among the seven accused who faced trial in the case for offences under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and the Indian Penal Code. The other acuused include - Major (retired) Ramesh Upadhyay, Ajay Rahirkar, Sudhakar Dwivedi, Sudhakar Chaturvedi and Sameer Kulkarni. The National Investigation Agency (NIA), which conducted the probe into the case, has sought "commensurate punishment" for the accused. During its final arguments, the NIA told the court that the Malegaon blast — which occurred in a town with a significant Muslim population — was orchestrated by the conspirators to terrorise a section of Muslim community, disrupt essential services, create communal tensions. The NIA based its finding on "relevant, admissible, cogent, trustworthy, wholly reliable and proved evidence" and "conclusively and cogently" established the crucial circumstances to form a complete chain of events. The blast took place during the holy month of Ramzan, just before the Navratri festival, the NIA pointed out, claiming the intention of the accused was to strike terror in a section of the Muslim community. The charges comprised UAPA sections 16 (committing terrorist act) and 18 (conspiring to commit terrorist act) and various IPC sections, including 120 (b) (criminal conspiracy), 302 (murder), 307 (attempt to murder), 324 (voluntarily causing hurt) and 153 (a) (promoting enmity between two religious groups). During the trial, the prosecution presented 323 witnesses, of whom 37 turned hostile. Thakur, in her final statement, submitted that her implication in the case is "totally illegal, bad in law and contrary to the law of the land and with malafide intention and ulterior motive". Purohit has submitted that "there is no material evidence" linking him to the alleged offence."The prosecution's case rests on fabricated and contradictory witness statements that are devoid of any independent corroboration and fail to meet the evidentiary threshold required in law," his final arguments claimed. Six persons were killed and more than 100 injured when an explosive device strapped to a motorcycle went off near a mosque in the town, located about 200 km from Mumbai, on September 29, 2008. The case was initially probed by the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) before being transferred to the NIA in 2011. (With inputs from agencies)
India.com
27 minutes ago
- India.com
Malegaon Blast Case Verdict To Be Delivered Today, 17 Years After The Deadly Explosion
After 17 years, a Special NIA court will announce its verdict in the 2008 Malegaon blast case on Thursday. Hearings and final arguments from both sides concluded on April 19, after which the court reserved its judgment. The court said that although the hearings concluded in April, the immense volume of evidence, exceeding one lakh pages, necessitated additional time to thoroughly review all materials before delivering the verdict. All the accused in the case have been instructed to be present in court on the day of the verdict. The court has also warned that action will be taken against any accused who is absent on that day. A total of seven individuals are facing trial in the case, including Lt Col Prasad Purohit, former BJP MP Pragya Singh Thakur, and retired Major Ramesh Upadhyay. They have been charged under various provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and the Indian Penal Code (IPC). All accused are currently out on bail. The blast occurred on September 29, 2008, in Malegaon, a communally sensitive town in Maharashtra, during the holy month of Ramzan and just ahead of Navratri. The explosion claimed six lives and left over 100 people injured. Over the course of a decade-long trial, the prosecution examined 323 witnesses, 34 of whom turned hostile. Initially, the case was investigated by the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS). However, in 2011, the probe was handed over to the NIA. In 2016, the NIA submitted a charge sheet that cleared Pragya Singh Thakur and several other accused, citing insufficient evidence. The verdict, which is going to be issued almost 17 years after the incident, is highly anticipated and is likely to have important legal and political consequences.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Ghaziabad court acquits two in stalking case, orders perjury action against complainant
A Ghaziabad court on July 29 acquitted two men accused of stalking a 13-year-old girl in 2019 and directed police to register a case under Section 344 of the CrPC against the complainant—the girl's mother—for allegedly filing a false FIR and giving misleading testimony in court. The FIR was registered against the two named suspects based on input from a police informer, following which both were taken into custody. (Getty Images/iStockphoto) The accused had been booked under IPC sections 354(d)(1)(i) (stalking), 504 (intentional insult), and 507 (criminal intimidation by anonymous communication), along with provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Pocso) Act. The FIR was lodged at Kavi Nagar police station on March 25, 2019. The chargesheet was filed on August 5, 2019. Special judge (Pocso) Lal Babu Yadav, while acquitting the two men, stated in his order that the complainant 'lodged an FIR on the basis of wrong facts... and deliberately gave false evidence in the court. So, a case under section 344 of the CrPC be registered against the complainant, and thereafter notice be issued.' During the trial, four prosecution witnesses were examined, including the girl, her mother, and two police officers. The defence presented no witnesses. Sub-inspector Ajay Verma told the court that the FIR was registered against the two named suspects based on input from a police informer, following which both were taken into custody. In court, the girl's mother said she had filed the complaint based on information provided by others and that the two accused were not involved. 'I wrote in my complaint whatever people at the spot told me. The two accused present in the court were not involved in the incident,' she testified. She was declared a hostile witness. The girl testified that she had been stalked but said, 'The two accused present in the court were not those two,' and could not identify who had hurled abuses. She too was declared hostile. Special public prosecutor (Pocso) Satish Sharma said he would respond to the judgement but did not take HT's calls later.
