A Year After Badlapur Sexual Assault, Bombay HC Slams State Over School Safety Failures

September 19, 2025

Background: The Badlapur Case

In August 2024, a shocking case emerged in Badlapur, where Akshay Shinde, a 23-year-old school cleaner, was accused of sexually assaulting two four-year-old girls. The incident exposed severe lapses in school safety protocols and triggered widespread outrage.

Following the incident, the Bombay High Court took suo motu cognizance and initiated a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) to examine child safety measures in schools across Maharashtra.

Government Resolution (GR) on School Safety

On May 13, 2025, the Maharashtra Department of School Education and Sports issued a 23-page Government Resolution (GR), based on recommendations of an expert committee appointed by the court. The GR mandated:

Installation of CCTV cameras at classroom entrances, corridors, main gates, playgrounds, and outside toilets.
Provision of counseling support for children.
Clear protocols for reporting and handling child abuse cases.
Greater collaboration between schools, parents, and authorities.

Court’s Frustration Over Non-Compliance

During the September 2025 hearing, the High Court bench of Justice Revati Mohite-Dere and Justice Sandesh Patil expressed deep dissatisfaction over the state’s failure to monitor implementation of the GR.

Key issues highlighted:

The state failed to submit a list of inspected schools.
No clarity on whether residential schools, Anganwadis, Ashramshalas, and Observation Homes were inspected.
12 key aspects of the GR remained unchecked by education officers.
Many public schools lacked complaint boxes for students.

The court observed:

“Are you waiting for another incident? Even after that you will shy away from taking responsibility.”

Data Reveals Alarming Safety Gaps

According to data presented by amicus curiae Rebecca Gonsalvez:

Out of 63,887 government schools, over half lacked CCTV surveillance and had no safety measures for child transport.
Only one-third of government schools had conducted character verification of staff.
Of 44,435 private schools, nearly 25% had no CCTV cameras and had not verified teachers’ backgrounds.

This data highlighted widespread non-compliance with safety standards, despite the GR being in place for months.

Court’s Directions to the State

The Bombay High Court issued strong directions to ensure accountability:

Create a public website to upload school-wise compliance data with the GR.
Provide schools 10–15 days to comply with safety protocols.
Ensure parents and PTAs are made aware of these measures.
Name non-compliant schools publicly to ensure transparency and accountability.

The bench emphasized that:

Compliance checklists should be made available online.
Parents should have easy access to safety data for their children’s schools.
Publicity must be given to the website to ensure awareness.

State’s Defense and Court’s Response

The state, represented by Prajakta Shinde, claimed:

Education officers visit 10 schools weekly and now also check GR compliance.
Anganwadis and ashram schools fall under the Tribal Department, and thus outside the education department’s purview.

The bench dismissed these justifications, stating:

“We are not concerned with the internal working of the state. What action are your officers taking?”

The court reiterated that all children, regardless of institution type, deserve equal safety standards.

Conclusion

The Bombay High Court’s stern stance underscores the urgent need for robust safety protocols in schools. A year after the Badlapur sexual assault case, the lack of compliance with mandatory guidelines reveals systemic negligence.

The Court’s directives aim to make school safety a transparent, accountable, and participatory process, ensuring that parents, schools, and the state collectively safeguard children.

Unless the state acts swiftly, such lapses risk eroding public trust and could expose children to preventable harm.