Chennai: “The parents are the first teachers for every child. The child would look at them as its role model and would imbibe their qualities and character” observed the Madras high court while rejecting a plea from advocate parent to quash the case pending against them. The parent had allegedly spoken very rudely to the teachers and principal of a school when they were summoned to set right the conduct of their son, who was found to be very mischievous and ill-behaved in the classroom.
Dismissing the petition from advocate G.Mohan Raj and his wife M. Roseline Mary, Justice P.N. Prakash said, “The first petitioner, who belongs to a noble profession, cannot conduct himself in an unbecoming manner and bring disrepute to the legal fraternity”. Only if parents inculcate good behavior and conduct at the formative stage, can their son make them proud by his achievements when he grows up. It was a solemn duty of parents to diligently strive for making their children good citizens. This was their valuable contribution to the society, the judge added.
Ashwin, a student of class V in Holy Innocents High School, Wellington, the Nilgiris, was found to be very mischievous and ill-behaved and therefore, his teachers had sent for his parents to meet the principal of the school. On January 21, 2009, the petitioners, parents of Ashwin, came to meet the principal, the first petitioner had allegedly spoken very rudely to her. It was further alleged that the first petitioner had told her that he was a leading lawyer in the high court and that if complaints were made against the conduct of his son, he would close down the school.
The principal summoned Ashwin’s teachers so that they themselves could explain to the petitioners about Ashwin’s behavior in the classroom. When the teachers approached the principal’s room, the petitioners prevented their entry and started taking videographing the school teachers in his mobile camera. He also made disparaging remarks about teachers. On a complaint from the principal, the police registered a case and filed a final report before the judicial magistrate, Coonoor. Aggrieved, the petitioners filed the present petitions.
The judge said the principal has no ulterior motive against petitioners for foisting a false case against them. When teachers brought to the notice of the principal about the conduct of the petitioner’s son, the petitioners were called to the school to apprise them of the situation, so that they could take remedial measures to set right the things. It was after all, for the good of their son, the petitioners were called. Instead of giving a patient hearing to what the teachers had to say about their son, the petitioners appear to have flaunted their prowess.
The epithets used by the first petitioner, as narrated by the principal and the teachers, prima facie disclose commission of the offences. That apart, the provisions of TN Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act may also be attracted for videographing women teachers, notwithstanding their objection, the judge added.
