Reasonable corporal punishment in schools is permissible under implied consent, but excessive force is not condoned, warranting quashing of proceedings when no serious injury is proven.

ORDER

This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is filed to quash the proceedings in C.C. No.2745/2016 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Thrissur.

2. Petitioners are the teachers and staff of the Chaldean Syrian Higher Secondary School, Thrissur. They are arrayed as accused in the above case which was charge sheeted alleging offences punishable under section 341 , 323 , 324 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code . The 3^rd petitioner is the Headmistress, and the 1^st and 2^nd petitioners are the teachers of the said school. The 4^th petitioner is the non-teaching staff of the said school.

3. The allegation put forth against the petitioners is that on 28.07.2016 at about 11 am, the 2^nd petitioner took the defacto complainant into the sports rooms alleging that he is consuming Hans, and it is submitted that the 1^st petitioner beaten him on the face. The 3^rd and 4^th petitioners restrained his movement by holding his hands while the 2^nd petitioner beaten his legs with reap and there by committed the above said offences. According to the petitioner, even if the entire allegations are accepted, no offence is made out. Hence this Crl.M.C. is filed.

4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor.

5. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that, even if the entire allegations are accepted, no offence is made out. It is further submitted that the defacto complainant is a student who has been caught red handed with banned item like Hans in school premises and warned him on different occasions for using the same. It is submitted that the petitioners' school is a reputed school in the locality. In 2016 itself the school authorities had received complaints from the students and parents that the 2^nd respondent is consuming Hans and such prohibited items in the school premises and also instigating other students to consume the same. It is submitted that the 2^nd respondent has insisted other students to do unnecessary activities. Annexures A3 & A4 were produced to show that there were complaints received from the students and parents of the students on different occasions against the 2^nd respondent. Thereafter PTA Executive Committee on its meeting held on 08.03.2016 has decided to call the parents of the 2^nd respondent and taken steps to solve the issue. Annexure A5 is the minutes of the PTA Executive Committed held on 08.03.2016. Even thereafter, the 2^nd respondent has continued with his activities and the school authorities had received complaints on different occasions is the submission. Annexures A6 to A9 were produced to prove the same. Thereafter, the petitioners had warned the 2^nd respondent and he continued with his activities is the submission. On 28.07.2016, the 2^nd petitioner has found out Hans from the 2^nd respondent's mouth and on enquiry the packet of Hans traced out from his bag. On further enquiry with him, he told that, he had obtained the same from a student by name Fazal studying in the 10^th standard. Thereafter, accused informed the parents of both students about the incident over phone. The 2^nd respondent's mother came to the school and the petitioners had directed her to take him for counselling. It is after that the 2^nd respondent lodged complaint against the petitioners is the submission. According to the petitioners, they have not committed any offences.

6. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the contentions raised by the petitioners are all matters of evidence and this Court may not interfere with the prosecution.

7. This Court considered the contentions of the petitioners and the Public Prosecutor. In Jomi v. State of Kerala [2024 KHC 574] , this Court considered a case in which there was allegation that a student was beaten by the school teacher, when she failed to secure