IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C. JAYACHANDRAN, J.
XXXXXXXXXX - Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala - Respondent
Crl. M.C. Nos. 8067, 9017, 10077 of 2024
Decided On : 27-06-2025
ORDER :
1. The culpability component in the context of offence under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ('B.N.S.' for short), and also the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 ('J.J. Act' for short), when a teacher canes a student in order to discipline him/her is the subject matter of these three Criminal Miscellaneous Cases, for which reason, the three cases are heard and disposed of by this Common Order.
2. Crl.M.C.No.8067/2024 Petitioner herein is the accused in Crime No.1375/2023 of Sulthan Bathery Police Station. She seeks to quash Annexure-A1 F.I.R. and also Annexure-A2 final report in the said crime. The prosecution would allege that the petitioner/accused had caned the victim, aged 9 years, due to his poor performance in the dictation conducted by the petitioner, besides publishing his mark list with zero marks in the WhatsApp group, causing physical and mental agony to the victim, thus committing the offences under Section 324 of the Penal Code and Section 75 of the J.J. Act.
3. Crl.M.C.No.9017/2024 The petitioner/accused seeks to quash Crime No.1521/2024 of Kodungallur Police Station. The prosecution would allege that the petitioner caned a student, aged six years, for not being attentive in the class, thus committing the offences under Section 118(1) of the B.N.S. and also under Section 75 of the J.J. Act.
4. Crl.M.C.No.10077/2024 The petitioner herein seeks to quash Crime No.148/2023 of North Paravur Police Station. The prosecution would allege that the petitioner/accused had beaten the victim, aged 9 years, using a P.V.C. pipe repeatedly on her thighs, during the dance practice session in connection with the Annual Day celebrations, thus committing the offences under Section 324 of the Penal Code and Section 75 of the J.J.Act.
5. All the petitioners relies on various judgments of this Court in Sindhu Sivadas v. State of Kerala, 2024 KLT OnLine 2559, Shyju v. State of Kerala, 2024 KLT OnLine 1761, Jayasree Asokan and Another v. State of Kerala and Others, 2024 KLT OnLine 1958 and Jomi v. State of Kerala and Others, 2024 KLT OnLine 1741 to buttress their arguments.
6. Having regard to the issues involved, this Court deemed fit and proper to appoint an Amicus and accordingly Adv.Jacob P.Alex was appointed as the Amicus Curiae.
7. Heard the learned Amicus; Counsel for the petitioners, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor, and also the learned counsel for respondent no.3 in Crl.M.C.No.9017/2024 and respondent no.2 in Crl.M.C.No.10077/2024 (the respective defacto complainants). Perused the records.
8. SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE AMICUS CURIAE:
Learned Amicus would submit that the issue at hand has to be viewed in the backdrop of the International Conventions on Child Rights. Learned Amicus specifically invited this Court's attention to the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989 ('Child Rights Convention', for short), specifically to Article 37(a) of that Convention, which reads as follows:
“No child shall be subjected to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment…...” (underlined for emphasis)
Article 16(1) of the Convention was also emphasised, which stipulates that no child shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his or her privacy, family etc., nor to unlawful attacks on his or her honour and reputation. As per Article 28(2) of the Child Rights Convention, the States Parties are mandated to take appropriate measures to ensure that school discipline is administered in a manner consistent with the child's human dignity and in conformity with the present Convention. It is pointed out by the learned Amicus that the Child Rights Convention of the year 1989 was ratified by India, and the child friendly laws, namely the J.J. Act, Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act etc., expressly recognize the U.N. Convention. Learned Amicus then invited the attention of this Court to Section 17 of the
Corporal punishment by teachers is not criminalized under the Juvenile Justice Act, and international treaties do not automatically enforceable without domestic legislation.
corporal punishment” means physical punishment that involves deliberate infliction of pain for a mistake or act of indiscipline by a child for the purpose of disciplining or reforming the child.
Corporal punishment by a teacher may not constitute an offence if it is performed with a bona fide intention to maintain discipline, as established under relevant IPC and JJ Act provisions.
A teacher may impose reasonable corporal punishment in good faith for discipline without constituting criminal liability.
The central legal point established is that the actions of the accused did not constitute an offence under the Juvenile Justice Act or the Indian Penal Code due to the absence of malafide intention a....
Teachers can impose reasonable discipline, provided there is no malice or excessive force. Such actions fall under implied authority granted by parents.
Disciplinary actions by teachers do not constitute offences under Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice Act if not intended to cause unnecessary suffering.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.