Revision summary
Molestation is a crime; a boycott of school-going girls is intimidation, not culture. Keep schools open; add escorts, lighting, protection and a real FIR, not a compromise panchayat. Do not cut rations to enforce elders’ dictate. Mould patriarchy with respected local voices, women’s separate hearings, and jobs for anxious young men — after justice, not as a swap for it. Intergenerational peace is shared honour and equal education, not the girl’s silence.
Model answer
Copper italics in this answer — like this — are the key facts. Each one is unpacked in the Facts & figures rail.
Introduction
A molestation is a crime. A boycott of families who send daughters to school is a second crime wearing custom. My duty is safety and Article 21A together, not a bargain that trades the girl for a quiet week.
Body
Stakeholders
- Girls who were assaulted and all girls who now fear the road.
- Families under threat of social boycott.
- Village elders, young men and women, and those who want jobs without sharing them.
- Schools, teachers, Panchayat, police, and women’s groups.
- You as District Development Officer, with development tools and a duty to call in law and order.
Values and issues
- Right to education and equality (Articles 14, 15, 21, 21A).
- Bodily integrity; molestation is not a “social dispute”.
- Dignity of the girl child; no peace that silences her.
- Emotional intelligence with elders without surrendering the Constitution to a boycott.
(a) Safety without disrupting education
- First 48 hours: criminal case for the molestation, medical care, in-camera statement, protection for witnesses and the girls’ homes. Do not hold a “compromise panchayat” that withdraws the FIR.
- Immediate safe passage: police or home-guard beat on the school route at opening and closing hours; volunteer parent chains; where needed a temporary vehicle or escort, not a lock on the school gate.
- Keep the school open. Closing it “for peace” rewards the assailants and the boycott.
- Lighting, trimming of isolated stretches, and a staffed room in the school until parents arrive.
- Protection against boycott: public distribution and other entitlements must not be cut by a private edict. Tell ration dealers and Panchayat staff that a social boycott enforced through official goods is unlawful. If needed, move supplies through a camp or a neighbouring depot.
- Meet girls and mothers separately from the shouting crossroads, so that fear can be spoken.
- Fast-track the criminal process so that the village does not invent its own punishment of the victims.
- If some men block the road, it is a law-and-order offence, not a debate on culture.
(b) Moulding patriarchal attitude, harmony between generations
- Do not humiliate elders in public on day one; humiliation hardens them. Also do not sit at their feet and trade the girls’ attendance for their blessing.
- Separate the assault from the employment fear. Jobs for women are not the cause of molestation; crime is.
- Use respected local voices who already educate daughters — a retired teacher, a woman sarpanch from a nearby panchayat, a faith leader who will quote dignity rather than seclusion.
- Show numbers: schemes, scholarships, and examples of local women who study without “ruining” the village. Fear of male unemployment is a real anxiety; answer it with skills and work for youth, not with pulling girls out of class.
- Gram sabha after the crime is charged, not instead of the charge: a facilitated dialogue on safety, with women speaking, and a written village pledge that boycott is illegal.
- Long term: girls’ toilets, female teachers, secondary school within reach, and Beti Bachao Beti Padhao-type mobilisation that is local, not only a banner.
- Intergenerational harmony is not silence of the young. It is elders keeping honour, and youth keeping rights, in the same street. Honour that needs an uneducated daughter is not honour.
Options I reject
- Option: close school until tempers cool.
- Merit: fewer clashes this week.
- Demerit: the Constitution loses; the molester learns the method.
- Option: only lectures on patriarchy without a charge-sheet.
- Merit: looks modern.
- Demerit: girls remain unsafe; elders call it insult.
What I should do as DDO
- Coordinate with the District Magistrate and Superintendent of Police; development officers do not run a crime scene alone.
- Fund the escort, lights and toilets from district schemes at once.
- Put the boycott on record as a threat to civil rights; use relevant penal provisions against criminal intimidation and against those who enforce a blockade of school-going children.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD CRIME[Molestation] --> FIR[FIR care protection] FIR --> SCHOOL[School stays open with escort] BOY[Social boycott] --> BLOCK[Stop blockade of entitlements] ELD[Elders fear] --> TALK[Dialogue after charge not instead] TALK --> JOB[Youth skills without pulling girls out]
Conclusion
Safety is a criminal investigation plus a guarded road, not a closed school. Patriarchal fear is answered with dialogue, female leadership and youth jobs, after the assault is treated as a crime. Harmony that needs a girl at home is not harmony.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
Case study. A private company is known for its efficiency, transparency, and employee welfare. The company though owned by a private individual has a cooperative character where employees feel a sense of ownership. The company employs nearly 700 personnel and they have voluntarily decided not to form a union. One day suddenly in the morning, about 40 men belonging to a political party gatecrashed into the factory demanding jobs in the factory. They threatened the management and employees and also used foul language. The employees feel demoralized. It was clear that those people who gate-crashed wanted to be on the payroll of the company as well as continue as the volunteers/members of the party The company maintains high standards in integrity and does not extend favors to civil administration that also includes law enforcement agencies. Such incidents occur in the public sector also. (a) Assume you are the CEO of the company. What would you do to diffuse the volatile situation on the date of gate-crashing with the violent mob sitting inside the company premises? (b) What could be the long-term solution to the issue discussed in the case? (c) Every solution/action that you suggest will have a positive and a negative impact on you (as CEO), the employees, and the performance of the employees. Analyze the consequences of each of your suggested actions.
Next question on this syllabus topic (2015 · Q13). View answer →
-
If elders are angry, is a short school holiday wise?
A holiday that is really a surrender teaches violence. A day for a funeral is not the same as closing girls’ education until men calm down.
-
Can you change patriarchy in a week?
No. You can stop the crime and the boycott in a week and start a longer conversation. The girl does not wait at home for the conversation to finish.
Same topic · past papers
UPSC has asked this before
These previous-year questions sit on the same topic. Open one to practise the earlier ask.
More from this topic
Q12 · UPSC Mains 2026 · GS IV · 20 marks · Solution
Case study. Ajit has been recently promoted as the Head of the Department of Weapon Sales (DWS) in the Ministry of Defence Production (MDP). His charter of duties includes international sales of weapons produced domestically by MDP. In two recent wars, MDP weapons have performed admirably, resulting in many countries showing interest in buying them, particularly long-range artillery and missiles. Country A and country B have asked for these weapons. However, production constraints restrict DWS to accept only one purchase order. Country A is a developing nation with a sound technology base. MDP is planning R&D collaboration with it for the next generation of weapons. It is not part of any security alliance and needs weapons for protection from a troublesome neighbour. It seeks a large acquisition on a long-term loan. Country B is also a developing nation. Military strength is its priority, with the military budget often ingressing into allocations for human resources and infrastructure development. It is in security alliance with a superpower who has a large military base there and periodically allots it financial grants. It is a member of an economic bloc with which the government is currently negotiating a free trade agreement. It is not a signatory of NPT but possesses smaller nuclear weapons and delivery systems. It supports some guerrilla forces abroad. It has sought a smaller acquisition and is prepared to make some advance payment. It is currently negotiating arms purchases from another nation too. Ajit discussed this case with his counterparts in the related departments. Therein, the significant economic benefits, employment generation and stronger diplomatic relations arising from this sale were highlighted. It was also emphasized that refusing the deal could result in country B purchasing weapons from some other supplier. Ajit was aware that in arms sales, due diligence at each stage was pivotal to ensure conformity to national policy and international treaties. (a) Discuss the options available to Ajit. Which option should he select and why? (b) How can Ajit balance nation's economic and strategic interests with ethical considerations?
Ethics Case Studies
This case study examines ethical dilemma in defense exports, balancing economic gains, strategic partnerships, and non-proliferation norms. Ajit must choose between Country A for R&D collaboration and self-reliance, or Country B for immediate financial gains and FTA leverage. The recommended course prioritizes long-term strategic security, technological synergy, and international humanitarian norms over short-term mercantile interests.
Q11 · UPSC Mains 2026 · GS IV · 20 marks · Solution
Case study. Rajapuram is a border district. Jhara and Biru, its two major communities are in continual conflict with each other. The social fabric is fractured and demands mending. Ethnic tensions between the two communities have erupted into violence resulting in a large number of deaths. The stated causes are conflicting land claims, uneven resource allocation and inadequate political representation in government bodies. Separate relief camps had to be created for the two communities. The situation is volatile and appears to be getting out of control. Rajan has been appointed the District Magistrate (DM) of Rajapuram and tasked to quickly get the situation under control. His immediate tasks include restoring administrative authority, reopening the highway and initiating peace talks. On taking over his appointment, Rajan realized that the inter-community rivalry had even seeped into the local administration and police. With functional neutrality being the immediate casualty, it had made both communities distrustful of the government. The neighbouring country could utilize the opportunity to spur insurgent activity and further aggravate the situation. Rajan favoured a controlled approach starting with opening the highway to restore food and medical supplies. He toyed with the idea of requisitioning CRPF units to help restore administrative control. (a) Discuss the ethical issues that need to be addressed in this case. (b) What are the options open to Rajan? Which option would ensure protection of his non-partisan image without compromising ethics?
Ethics Case Studies
This GS4 case study examines the ethical dilemmas faced by a District Magistrate in managing an ethnic conflict in a sensitive border district. It analyses the ethical issues involving neutrality, human life, security, and institutional trust. It evaluates options ranging from purely coercive measures to inclusive peace-building. The recommended approach balances administrative firmness with transparent, unbiased stakeholder engagement to uphold public service values.
Q10 · UPSC Mains 2026 · GS IV · 20 marks · Solution
Case study. Vikas is a government officer with over a decade of service in public administration. He has recently moved as the District Collector (DC) of Nainipura, a remote hilly district bordering a forest. Due to Nainipura's low levels of economic development, one of his major duties is to ensure proper functioning of the public distribution system (PDS) amongst the economically weaker sections (EWS). During his on-site visits, Vikas was apprised of a typical administrative challenge in operating the PDS. To prevent leakages, all distributors were required to carry out real-time biometric identification of the beneficiaries, whose fingerprints were tallied with identity card records. This was creating problems as the operating system sometimes rejected fingerprint matching in the cases of growing children, manual labourers and senior citizens. The problem was further compounded in periods of low WIFI connectivity. The distributors, in such cases, resorted to personal discretion when they could identify the recipient. Vikas had to address this problem on priority. Strictly adhering to 'government regulations' would ensure fiscal probity but would greatly trouble the proposed beneficiary, i.e., EWS. It may even impinge on their fundamental right to life as per Article 21 of the Constitution. Conversely, leaving the resolution solely to the discretion of the distributors could lead to misuse and leakages. (a) What are the options open to Vikas? How should he balance fiscal probity with empathy towards the designated beneficiaries? (b) Discuss the ethics of using technology as a gatekeeper for welfare schemes.
Ethics Case Studies
• Balance strict digital rules with human empathy to prevent vulnerable citizens from losing entitled rations due to technical failures. • Avoid extreme approaches like rigid enforcement (causing exclusion) or unchecked discretion (causing leakage and corruption). • Implement practical offline workarounds like manual registers, paper slips, or OTPs backed by periodic audits. • Treat procedural norms and technology as tools for human welfare rather than rigid ends in themselves. • Recognize that digital gatekeeping creates ethical tensions between fiscal efficiency and the exclusion of genuine beneficiaries. • Guard against technology violating human dignity by forcing vulnerable groups to repeatedly prove their identity against system errors. • Ensure administrative accountability so systemic technological failures are not unfairly blamed on the citizens.