Corporal punishment imposed by teachers is not criminalized under current law, limiting liability unless explicitly defined, reaffirming the dualistic nature of law enforcement of international treaties in India.

COMMON ORDER

Dated this the 27^th day of June, 2025

'Spare the rod, Spoil the child'

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 punishmen t…...” (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 s