Kerala High Court Quashes Case Against Teacher, Says Trivial Punishment to Maintain Discipline Not a Crime
The Kerala High Court has quashed a criminal case against a teacher who was booked for allegedly inflicting corporal punishment on a student, after finding no criminal intention on the teacher's part. The court also held that a teacher cannot be prosecuted in a criminal proceeding merely for inflicting trivial punishment to correct a child or to maintain discipline in an institution.
The case dates back to 2018. The petitioner, a class teacher, was accused of catching hold of a fifth-standard student's hand and pulling her, with the alleged intention of causing hurt. The student's leg got entangled in a bench, and she sustained a contusion and pain on her right knee. The crime was initially registered under Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, and Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code. After investigation, the police filed a final report alleging offences under Section 82(1) of the Juvenile Justice Act and Section 323 of the IPC. The case was pending before the Special Court constituted to try offences under the Juvenile Justice Act.
The teacher approached the High Court seeking to quash the final report. A Single Bench of Justice Jobin Sebastian noted that statements from other students who witnessed the incident suggested the teacher had caught the victim's hands and pulled her without any mala fide intention, and only as a measure to maintain discipline in the classroom. The court observed that the materials collected during investigation did not indicate any criminal intention on the petitioner's part to harass, abuse or cause injury to the child.
In its ruling, the Bench said teachers have a duty to guide, correct and discipline students, and in discharging this responsibility they play a role akin to that of a parent. However, this responsibility must always be exercised with care and without causing harm to the child. The court added that merely because a teacher has inflicted a trivial punishment as a corrective measure, he or she cannot be prosecuted in a criminal proceeding. It warned that if teachers are subjected to criminal prosecution under the Juvenile Justice Act for implementing simple and minimal corrective measures to preserve institutional discipline, the very administration and orderly functioning of educational institutions would be jeopardised.
Finding that the allegations did not show the petitioner had subjected the child to corporal punishment with any mala fide intention, and noting that the wound certificate suggested only minor injuries were sustained, the Bench allowed the petition and quashed the final report as well as all further proceedings pursuant to it.
Advocate Gopakumar R. Thaliyal represented the petitioner, while Senior Public Prosecutor Navas V.A. represented the respondent. The case is titled Jolly John v. State of Kerala.
Source: Verdictum