Intention Was To Alert Student About Necessity Of Studying Well: Kerala HC Quashes Criminal Case Against Teacher Accused Of Beating Student
The Kerala High Court observed that if teachers were roped under the provisions of the Juvenile Justice Act (JJ Act) for devising simple corrective measures to keep the discipline of the School, then the School’s discipline would be in peril.
The Bench quashed charges under Section 324 of the IPC and Section 82 of the JJ Act against an English teacher who was accused of beating a 13-year-old minor girl after she failed to secure fair marks in a test paper conducted by the teacher.
A Single Bench of Justice A. Badharudeen observed, “It has to be held that the teacher had no malafide intention while beating the accused or his intention was to guide the student by alerting her to the necessity of studying well and securing high marks in the subject. If teachers being roped into under the provisions of the JJ Act for devicing simple and least onerous corrective measures to keep the discipline of the School or the Educational Institution the discipline of the School or the Institution would be in peril.”
Advocate Shibu Varghese represented the petitioner, while Sr. P.P. Renjit George appeared for the respondents.
The teacher, who was also the School Principal, argued that Section 82 of the JJ Act, which addresses corporal punishment by persons in charge of or employed in child care institutions, was not applicable. According to Section 2(21) of the JJ Act, a "Child Care Institution" included facilities such as Children's Homes, Open Shelters, and Observation Homes, but does not encompass schools.
It was further argued that Section 75 of the JJ Act would not apply as imposing some lesser punishment as part of discipline acting on the implied authority given by the parents to guide the student with bonafide intention would not constitute an offence.
The Court explained that the act of a teacher on a student in imposing corporal punishment depended upon the circumstances of each case. “If a teacher out of fury and excitement, inflicts injuries which is harmful to the health of a tender aged student, it cannot be accepted as a right conferred on such a teacher to inflict such punishment, because of the express or implied authority granted by the parents of that student,” the Court remarked.
Since Section 2(21) of the JJ Act did not include a school, the Bench held that Section 82 of the JJ Act would only apply specifically to child care institutions and not schools.
“Coming to Section 324 of the IPC, the same would not attract since there is nothing available in the prosecution records to suggest that the accused beat the student with malafide intention so as to cause hurt to her,” the Court observed.
Consequently, the Court held that the teacher had no malafide intention while beating the minor student since “his intention was to guide the student by alerting her to the necessity of studying well and securing high marks in the subject.”
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the petition.
Cause Title: Jomi v. State of Kerala & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024:KER:48062)
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocate Shibu Varghese
Respondents: Sr. P.P. Renjit George; Advocate K.N.Govindankutty Menon
