IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that actions taken in good faith to correct a child's misbehavior, without intent to harm, do not constitute child abuse under the Goa Children's Act or assault under the IPC.

JUDGMENT/ORDER

1. The appellant is challenging the judgment dtd. 3/5/2019 in Special Case No.58/2014 whereby the learned Children's Court, Panaji found appellant guilty for the offence punishable under Sec. 323 of I.P.C. and 8(2) of Goa Children's Act and accordingly sentenced for imprisonment and fine.

2. The appeal was admitted on 27/6/2019 and thereafter Records And Proceedings along with paper-book were called.

3. Heard Mr Arun De Sa, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr Gaurish Nagvenker, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents.

4. With the assistance of learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, I have perused records as well as findings in the impugned judgment.

5. The learned counsel Shri De Sa appearing for the appellant strongly contended that in the present matter prosecution has failed to prove that the accused/appellant was involved in any assault on the victim child so as to punish him for both the offences. In the alternative he submitted that even if he considered that there was some force used by the accused against the minor, it was not with intent to assault him but only to correct him for his mistake and to inform his teacher. He submitted that the learned Children's Court failed to consider this aspect and more particularly the provisions of Sec. 88 and 89 of I.P.C. He would submit that the definition of physical or psychological abuse as defined in Sec. 2 (m) of Goa Children's Act is vague and, therefore, such physical abuse cannot be construed as an assault or causing hurt as there is no mens rea involved.

6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor Shri Nagvenker would submit that statement of victim as well as that of his classmate is sufficient enough to consider that the accused committed child abuse and, therefore, the findings of learned Children's Court need no interference. He would submit that definition of child abuse has to be taken into account as per the aims and objects of Goa Children's Act which basically consider environment in which the child should be treated and protected. Any physical harm caused to the child or any harm caused to his dignity is sufficient enough for imposing punishment.

7. Rival contention falls for the consideration of this Court as under: Whether prosecution succeeded in proving that accused committed the offence of child physical abuse?

8. Since the victim was 13 years old at the relevant time, matter was directly filed before the Children's Court of Goa and, accordingly, charges were framed against the accused for the offences punishable under Sec. 323 of I.P.C and Sec. 8(2) of Goa Children's Act.

9. In nutshell, it is the case of prosecution that on on 31/8/2013 at around 12:45hrs in the premises of Infant Jesus High School, Colva, accused assaulted minor son of the complainant aged 13 years with slaps on his face and thus committed child abuse.

10. During trial, prosecution has examined in all 8 witnesses. PW1 is the mother of the victim who is not the eye-witness but set the law in motion by filing complaint which is at Exhibit 9, dtd. 31/8/2013. PW2 is the victim child who was studying in 8th Standard in the said school. He deposed that on 31/8/2013 he along with his elder sister went to the school and 7th lecture was of Scouts and Guides from 12:45 to 13:15 hours. During the said period of Scouts and Guides, the teacher was teaching them games as well as knowledge regarding nature. On the relevant day students of 8th Standard class were doing cleaning and after finishing such work he along with his friend, PW6 went to wash hands near the tap in the school premises. After washing their hands and while returning, he accidentally dashed one earthen pot which was on the ground. Due to it, the pot fall aside but did not break. On seeing this the accused came angrily towards him and slapped on his left side face. Accused then dragged him by holding the collar of his shirt. In the meantime, the P.E. Teacher came and he rescued the victim from