In a petition filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, by an accused in a matter pending before the Additional Sessions Judge (Special Court), Palakkad, a Single Judge Bench of Justice C. Pratheep Kumar held that the teacher had acted well within his limits and quashed the criminal proceedings against him.
On 16-09-2019, a 5th standard student (victim) was engaged in a fight with other students of the Mambad CAUP School when the accused teacher (petitioner) intervened and beat the children on the legs with a cane.
The teacher contended that he was only performing his duty to restrain the students for maintaining discipline and that he had no intention of harming them.
The Court took note of decisions in K.A. Abdul Vahid v. State of Kerala 2005 (2) KLT 72, Rajan @ Raju v. Sub Inspector of Police & Anr. 2019 (1) KLT 119, and Jomi v. State of Kerala [2024 (2) KLD 230]. The Court stated that a school teacher, because of his peculiar position, has the authority to enforce discipline and correct a pupil.
It was further stated that when a parent entrusts a child to a teacher, the parent implicitly consents to the teacher exercising that authority over the student. The Court said that if it is found that the teacher acted with good intention in subjecting a student to corporal punishment solely to improve the student, the teacher is within their limits.
The Court perused the statement of the child and found it to be clear that the students were beating each other with sticks when the teacher intervened to enforce discipline in class. Further, the Court found no evidence regarding the bodily injury sustained by the victim, which meant that the teacher had used only minimal force while caning the students.
Thus, the Court stated that the teacher’s conduct was intended only to correct the students and was well within his authority, but found it unfortunate that the parents could not understand the teacher’s good intentions. The Court held that the petitioner’s conduct did not amount to any offence and stated that this was a fit case for the Court to invoke its inherent power to quash the proceedings.
Thus, the Court quashed the proceedings against the teacher and allowed the present petition.
Appearances:
For Petitioner – Mr. V.A. Johnson (Varikkappallil)
For Respondent(s) – Public Prosecutor, Mr. A. Vipin Narayan
