A teacher may impose reasonable corporal punishment in good faith for discipline without constituting criminal liability.

O R D E R Dated this the 3^rd day of February, 2026 The petitioner, who is the sole accused in SC.1401/2025 on the file of the Additional Sessions Court (Atrocities & Sexual violence against Women and Children), Thiruvananthapuram, arising out of Crime No.293/2025 of Vizhinjam Police Station, filed this petition under Section 528 of the BNS S praying for quashing all further proceedings against him. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Section 118(1) of and Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children)Act ('JJ Act' for short).

2. The prosecution case is that the accused, who is a teacher of the defacto complainant, on 10.2.2025 at about 12.30 p.m., at the staff room of VPS Malankara School, Venganoor, voluntarily caused hurt to the defacto complainant by beating him with a cane on his buttocks and thereby he is alleged to have committed the aforesaid offences.

3. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, this is a false foisted against the petitioner. Further according to him, the allegations levelled against the petitioner does not constitute the offences as alleged. Therefore, he prayed for quashing all further proceedings against the petitioner.

4. The petition was strongly opposed by the learning Public Prosecutor.

5. Though notice was served on the defacto complainant/2^nd respondent, he did not turn up.

6. Though the alleged incident was on 10.2.2025, the FIR was seen registered only on 13.2.2025. The Accident Register cum Wound Certificate issued from the Community Health Centre, Vizhinjam, also shows that the child was reported before that hospital only on 13.2.2025 at about 7 p.m., with the history of pain over buttocks. In the wound certificate, no external injuries were seen by the Doctor, who treated the victim.

7. As argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner, in order to attract the offence punishable under Section 118(1) of the BNS , the weapon used must be a dangerous one. Section 118(1) of reads as follows:

“118 – Voluntarily causing hurt or grievous hurt by dangerous weapons or means.

1. Whoever, except in the case provided for by sub-section (1) of section 122, voluntarily causes hurt by means of any instrument for shooting, stabbing or cutting, or any instrument which, used as a weapon of offence, is likely to cause death, or by means of fire or any heated substance, or by means of any poison or any corrosive substance, or by means of any explosive substance or by means of any substance which it is deleterious to the human body to inhale, to swallow, or to receive into the blood, or by means of any animal, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine which may extend to twenty thousand rupees, or with both.”

8. Since the weapon allegedly used by the petitioner is only a cane, the same does not amount to a dangerous weapon as defined under Section 118(1) of the BNS . Therefore, the allegations against the petitioner does not constitute the offence under Section 118(1) of .

9. The extent to which a teacher could lawfully inflict corporal punishment on a student under his control was dealt with by this court in some decisions. In the decision in K.A.Abdul Vahid v. State of Kerala 2005(2)KLT

72 this court held in paragraphs 3, 4 and 8 as follows:

3. The reporting of instances, similar to the facts stated above, are rare. Often, when such instances are brought to the notice of the parents or others, they are not taken-seriously, as a teacher has an implied consent or authority to maintain the school discipline and also to train a student based on the Rules of a school. When a student do not behave properly or act according to the Rules of a school, and if the tea