She Simply Beat The Student Only When She Was Abused By Him: Kerala HC Quashes Criminal Case Against Teacher

The incident in question occurred when the teacher asked the student why he was lounging with his feet on top of his desk, which she perceived as disrespectful. In response, the student verbally abused her, prompting the teacher to discipline him by catching him by the ears and striking him with a stick. The student claimed that the incident caused him injuries.

A Bench of Justice A. Badharudeen said, “In this case, it is not fair to hold that the teacher done anything with intention to cause unnecessary mental or physical suffering to the student. Even she simply beat the student only when she was abused by the student. Thus, the factual matrix of this case makes no offence under Section 75 of the JJ Act. Therefore, quashment prayer is liable to succeed.”

The Court noted the stark contrast between contemporary teacher-student dynamics and the revered guru-shishya (teacher-student) bond depicted in ancient texts like the Mahabharata. Referring to the story of Ekalavya, who willingly severed his right thumb as a token of respect to his teacher, Dronacharya, the Court remarked that in the past, the bond between teachers and students was built on respect and sacrifice. However, he observed, in the modern era, this relationship had been “upside down,” with teachers now fearful of facing criminal cases or even arrest for disciplining their students.

The Court highlighted a shift in the teacher-student relationship, lamenting the modern fear teachers face of criminal charges or arrest when they attempt to discipline students. The Court said, “This is a typical case where the student called an abusive word against the teacher, when she simply instructed the student to sit properly at the class. The immediate response of the student was by calling the teacher an abusive word, as extracted hereinabove. Only when the student used abusive word against the teacher, the teacher beat the student and the same did not cause any injuries or sufferings. But police registered crime alleging offence punishable under Section 75 of the JJ Act.”

However, the Court found that the teacher's actions did not amount to any serious physical harm or cruelty, as defined under Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice Act, which criminalizes the mistreatment of children.

Advocate Rajit appeared for the Petitioner, while Public Prosecutor P. Prasanth appeared for the Respondent.

The Court further expressed concern about the current state of discipline in schools, particularly the trend of students disrespecting teachers. The Court warned that this trend could have dangerous implications for the functioning of educational institutions, as teachers might be deterred from fulfilling their duties due to the fear of legal repercussions.

The Court quashed all criminal charges against the teacher, including those under Section 324 (hurt) of the Indian Penal Code and the Juvenile Justice Act. The Court clarified that the teacher’s actions were prompted solely by the student’s verbal abuse, and that no lasting harm or suffering had been caused.

Cause Title: X v. State of Kerala & Anr., [2024:KER:79761]