Delhi HC to DPS, Dwarka: Using bouncers to block students' entry over fees is ‘mental harassment'
A single-judge bench of Justice Sachin Datta remarked, "This court is constrained to express its dismay at the alleged conduct of the petitioner school in engaging "bouncers" to physically block the entry of certain students into the school premises. Such a reprehensible practice has no place in an institute of learning. It reflects not only a disregard for the dignity of a child but also a fundamental misunderstanding of a school's role in society.
"
The court was hearing a petition filed by parents of students who had been expelled last month for non-payment of fees. It was informed that the school later withdrew its expulsion orders following a directive from a coordinate bench, reinstating the affected students.
The court emphasised that any form of public shaming or intimidation over financial issues, especially using force or coercive means, constitutes mental harassment and undermines a child's psychological well-being.
"The use of bouncers fosters a climate of fear, humiliation, and exclusion, which is incompatible with the ethos of education," the bench stated.
While noting that the school is entitled to charge reasonable for its operations—to sustain infrastructure, remunerate staff, and provide a conducive learning environment—the court underlined that an educational institution cannot be equated with a commercial enterprise.
"The driving force of a school—especially one managed by a reputed society—must be public welfare, nation-building, and holistic child development, not profit maximisation.
The primary objective of a school is to impart education and inculcate values, not to operate as a business enterprise," the court observed.
As the school had reinstated the students, the court said the petition had become largely moot. However, it directed that any future action under Rule 35 of the Delhi School Education Rules, 1973, must be preceded by proper notice and an opportunity for the affected students or their guardians to respond.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News18
34 minutes ago
- News18
Delhi HCs three new judges take oath of office
Agency: PTI New Delhi, Jul 24 (PTI) Three new judges on Thursday took oath of office, taking the strength of the Delhi High Court to 43. Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya administered oath of office to Justices Vinod Kumar, Shail Jain and Madhu Jain. The swearing-in ceremony was held in the high court premises. All the three judicial officers, who have been elevated to the high court, took oath in Hindi. With their swearing-in, the high court's strength has gone up to 43. The sanctioned strength of the high court is 60. The Centre had on July 22 notified the appointment of three judicial officers of the Delhi district judiciary as judges of the high court. The three officers, who joined the Delhi Judicial Service in 1992, were serving as principal district and sessions judges at various trial courts prior to their elevation — Vinod Kumar was posted at Karkardooma court, Madhu Jain at Tis Hazari court and Shail Jain at Saket court. On July 21, six other judges — Justices V Kameswar Rao, Nitin Wasudeo Sambre, Vivek Chaudhary, Anil Kshetrapal, Arun Kumar Monga and Om Prakash Shukla — had taken oath of office of the Delhi High Court. PTI SKV SKV DV DV view comments First Published: July 24, 2025, 10:30 IST Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
New Indian Express
35 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Delhi HC takes note of poor functioning of One-Stop Centres for women
NEW DELHI: Taking serious note of the poor functioning of Delhi's One Stop Centres (OSCs) for women affected by violence, the Delhi High Court on Wednesday issued a series of directions to the city government to ensure their effective operation and raise public awareness. The court was responding to a news report that exposed the alarming conditions at these centres, which are meant to provide integrated support and assistance to women in distress. A bench comprising Chief Justice D K Upadhyay and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela remarked that the report 'gives a telling story of the pathetic situation prevailing in OSCs.' The bench criticised both the Delhi government and the police for failing to take adequate steps to implement and publicise the objectives of the centres. It directed the government to create widespread awareness about the OSCs by publishing advertisements in at least two newspapers and installing signboards at prominent public locations across the city—including schools, hospitals, railway stations, bus terminals, markets, and police stations. The signboards must carry detailed information about the OSCs and relevant helpline numbers. Although the Delhi government had submitted an affidavit on May 19, 2025, outlining the steps it had taken, the court found these measures unsatisfactory. 'Having regard to the affidavit filed, we are constrained to observe that necessary steps and actions which are required to be taken... have not been taken,' the bench noted. The directions came during a hearing on a plea filed by the NGO Bachpan Bachao Andolan, which highlighted critical lapses in OSC functioning—such as underutilisation, unpaid staff, lack of infrastructure, and inadequate deputation of police personnel.
Time of India
6 hours ago
- Time of India
HC Lists Series Of Steps To Fix Problems At One-Stop Centres
New Delhi: Highlighting the "pathetic situation" of One Stop Centres (OSCs) set up to help women and child victims of sexual crimes, Delhi High Court on Wednesday gave several directions to streamline their functioning. From creating mass awareness through advertisements in newspapers to installing signboards at prominent locations near public buildings such as schools and hospitals, a bench of Chief Justice D K Sharma and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela also appointed a "high-ranking" nodal officer of the Delhi govt to implement its directions on the matter. It also directed the circulation of the standard operating procedure developed for handling child pregnancies and marriages among police personnel manning such centres. Citing an affidavit filed by the Delhi govt in May outlining steps taken, HC put on record that it was "not satisfied with the steps and measures taken" and further said it was "constrained to observe that necessary steps and action which are required to be taken on behalf of the govt and Delhi police have not been taken." You Can Also Check: Delhi AQI | Weather in Delhi | Bank Holidays in Delhi | Public Holidays in Delhi In a slew of directions, the court directed that signboards for creating awareness for OSCs "shall also be displayed in the vicinity of schools, hospitals, railway stations, bus stations, and other conspicuous places. The said signboards and newspaper advertisements, apart from containing the necessary information, shall also contain the helpline number to be contacted in cases of emergency." HC also took exception to the absence of counsellors in the OSCs and ordered the govt's Women and Child Development department to fill all vacancies in the OSCs, adding it may hire contractual employees if regular postings take time, clarifying that they will have no right to seek regularisation. In its order, the court recorded the Centre's stand that it has released sufficient funds to the Delhi govt for the salaries of OSC workers and other purposes. HC's directions came after taking note of a newspaper report about the paucity of staffers to take care of the victims and other issues plaguing the OSCs, which in turn was flagged in a petition filed by NGO Bachpan Bachao Andolan, represented by advocate Prabhsahay Kaur. The Supreme Court in December 2018 asked the states and Union Territories to set up at least one OSC in every district of the country in the interest of children and women within one year from the passing of the verdict.
