Jayasree Asokan and Nita Subramanian v. State of Kerala and Others

## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** # **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN ``` ``` TUESDAY, THE 23[RD] DAY OF JULY 2024 / 1ST SRAVANA, 1946 ``` ``` CRL.MC NO. 1044 OF 2023 ``` ``` CRIME NO.33/2023 OF PAVARATTY POLICE STATION, THRISSUR ``` ## **`PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:`** ``` 1JAYASREE ASOKAN W/O.MM ASOKAN, AGED 59 YEARS PRINCIPAL, SREE GOKULAM PUBLIC SCHOOL GURUUVAYOOR – 680 511 RESIDING AT FORMS OAKWOOD VILLA NO 2, NELLIKKUNNU, THRISSUR, PIN - 680005 2NITA SUBRAMANIAN AGED 42 YEARS VICE PRINCIPAL, SREE GOKULAM PUBLIC SCHOOL GURUUVAYOOR, RESIDING AT KUMMATH HOUSE, KAKASSERI, CHITTATTUKARA VIA, THRISSUR, PIN - 680511 BY ADVS. NIDHI BALACHANDRAN C.UNNIKRISHNAN (KOLLAM) VIJAYKRISHNAN S. MENON UTHARA A.S ANANDA PADMANABHAN VIVEK NAIR P. ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:`** - **`1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031`** - **`2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER PAVARATTY, POLICE STATION, THRISSUR, PIN - 680509`** - **`3 XXXX XXXX`** - **`ADDL R4 XXXX XXXX`** ``` CRL.MC NO. 1044 OF 2023 ``` ``` 2 ``` ``` ADDL R5XXXX XXXX ADDL R6XXXX XXXX ADDL R7XXXX XXXX ARE IMPLEADED AS ADDITIONAL RESPONDENTS 4 TO 7 AS PER ORDER DATED 31.01.2024 IN CRL.M.A.NO.2/2024 IN CRL.M.C.1044/2023 ``` ``` BY ADVS. MANSOOR B.H .ADVOCATE NO ADVOCATE SAKEENA BEEGUM(K/001187/2021) GOUTHAM KRISHNA U.B. ``` ``` SRI.RENJIT GEORGE, SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ``` ``` THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON ``` ``` 23.07.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` CRL.MC NO. 1044 OF 2023 ``` ``` 3 ``` ## **O R D E R** Dated this the 23[rd] day of July, 2024 This Criminal Miscellaneous Case has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to quash all further proceedings in Crime No.33/2023 of Pavaratty Police Station, Thrissur. The petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2 in the above crime. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned counsel for the defacto complainant and the learned Public Prosecutor in detail. Perused the relevant documents. 3. In this matter, the prosecution alleges commission of offences punishable under Sections 341, 323 and 506(1) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code as well as 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as 'JJ Act', for short) and the allegation is that the first accused, who is the Principle of Sree Gokulam Public School, Chittattukara, and the 2[nd] ``` CRL.MC NO. 1044 OF 2023 ``` ``` 4 ``` accused, who is the Vice Principal of the said school, slapped on the cheek of the victim, a student of the school, and some of his friends, on the allegations that they sang inside the class. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners canvassed quashment of the proceedings and he has placed judgment of this Court in **Jomi V. State of Kerala and Others,** reported in **2024 (4) KLT 297** and also placed another decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in **Geo Varghese v. State of Rajasthan and Another,** reported in **2021 KHC 6593.** 5. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, no external injuries are noted in so far as the victim is concerned, and therefore, the overt acts would not come within the purview of onerous punishment so as to attract the offences alleged to be committed by the accused. 6. Whereas the learned counsel for the defacto complainant/4[th] respondent zealously opposed the ``` CRL.MC NO. 1044 OF 2023 ``` ``` 5 ``` contention, on the submission that on reading the statements of the victim under Sections 161 as well as 164 of Cr.P.C. along with the medical certificate, the overt acts would squarely attract _prima facie_ since because of the overt acts, the victim was subjected to severe mental and physical cruelty. He also placed a judgment of the Madras High Court in Crl.O.P. No.23120/2019 dated 04.03.2021 ( **S.Jai Singh and Others v. State of Tamil Nadu and Another)** , holding contra view as stated in **Jomi** ' s case ( _supra)._ In _**Jomi** ' s case (supra)_ , this Court in paragraph No.10 observed as under: _“10. Going by the prosecution allegations, a student studying in 8th Standard was beaten by the Principal and English Teacher of the School when she failed to secure fair marks in a test paper conducted by the Teacher. Though there is allegation of beating, no serious injuries sustained. Therefore, 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_ ``` CRL.MC NO. 1044 OF 2023 ``` ``` 6 ``` _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. At the same time, when the teacher exceeds his authority beyond the limit and causes serious injuries or physical assault of similar nature definitely the penal provisions of JJ Act would squarely apply. Viewing so,_ _it could not be held that the petitioner herein committed offence under Section 75 of the JJ Act”_ 7. In **Geo Varghese’s** case ( _supra),_ the Hon'ble Apex Court considered the allegation of commission of offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC, while quashing the complaint, and held as under: _“27. It is a solemn duty of a teacher to instil discipline in the students. It is not uncommon that teachers reprimand a student for not being attentive or not being upto the mark in studies or for bunking classes or not attending the school. The disciplinary measures adopted by a teacher or other authorities of a school, reprimanding a student for his indiscipline, in our considered opinion, would not tantamount to provoking a student to commit suicide, unless there are repeated specific allegations of harassment and insult deliberately without any justifiable cause or_ ``` CRL.MC NO. 1044 OF 2023 ``` ``` 7 ``` _reason. A simple act of reprimand of a student for his behaviour or indiscipline by a teacher, who is under moral obligations to inculcate the good qualities of a human being in a student would definitely not amount to instigation or intentionally aid to the commission of a suicide by a student._ _28. 'Spare the rod and spoil the child' an old saying may have lost its relevance in present days and Corporal punishment to the child is not recognised by law but that does not mean that a teacher or school authorities have to shut their eyes to any indiscipline act of a student. It is not only a moral duty of a teacher but one of the legally assigned duty under S.24(e) of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 to hold regular meetings with the parents and guardians and apprise them about the regularity in attendance, ability to learn, progress made in learning and any other act or relevant information about the child.”_ 8. The Madras High Court’s decision [ **S.Jai Singh’s** case ( _supra)]_ runs contra to the decisions referred by the learned counsel for the petitioners. 9. Coming to the allegations herein, the same is that, the victim, along with 21 other students, stayed at the hostel ``` CRL.MC NO. 1044 OF 2023 ``` ``` 8 ``` attached to Sree Gokulam Public School, Chittattukara, starting from 03.01.2023. There was class in between 6 pm and 10 pm at the instance of a tutor and collected Rs.7,350/for the said class. During leisure time, the students, including the victim, sang a song and had food brought from their house. At 10 am on 10.01.2023, they were brought to the Principal’s room and thereafter, the accused herein slapped on the cheek of five students, including the victim. The specific allegation is that the accused persons slapped on the left cheek of the victim and caught hold on his collar of the shirt. This is the basis on which the prosecution alleges commission of the above offences. 10. As submitted by the learned counsel for the 4[th] respondent in the 164 Cr.P.C. statement also, the victim repeated the same in tune with the FI Statement. That apart, in the medical records, in the form of accident register cum wound certificate issued from the Taluk Head Quarters Hospital, Chavakkad dated 12.01.2023, prepared at 10 am ``` CRL.MC NO. 1044 OF 2023 ``` ``` 9 ``` also is perused. On perusal, the observation is that “no external injuries visible”. Thus, going by the prosecution allegations, the accused herein simply slapped on the cheek of the victim, since they disobeyed the discipline of the school by singing during the interval. Thus the above overt act, which is not at all serious, was opted so as to ensure the discipline of the school and thus the accused did not commit any serious overt acts which would attract the above offences. Accordingly, going by the ratio in **Jomi’s** case (supra), it is held that _prima facie_ no offences made out to go for trial. Therefore, in the interest of justice, I am inclined to allow this petition. In the result, this petition stands allowed. All further proceedings in Crime No.33/2023 of Pavaratty Police Station, Thrissur, against the petitioner stand quashed. **Sd/A. BADHARUDEEN JUDGE** nkr ``` CRL.MC NO. 1044 OF 2023 ``` ## **`10`** ## **`APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 1044/2023`** ## **`PETITIONER ANNEXURES`** - **`ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO.33/23 DATED 13.01.2023 OF THE PAVARATTY POLICE STATION`** - **`ANNEXURE A2 A TRUE COPY OF THE WHATSAPP MESSAGE SENT BY THE 1ST PETITIONER TO THE PARENTS OF THE CHILDREN ON 02/01/23 AT 9.22.PM ALONG WITH IT'S TYPED COPY`** - **`ANNEXURE A3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SUBMITTED BY SUBMITTED TO THE SCHOOL AUTHORITIES BY ONE OF THE STUDENT`** - **`ANNEXURE A4 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SUBMITTED TO THE SCHOOL AUTHORITIES BY ONE OF THE STUDENT`** - **`ANNEXURE A5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SUBMITTED TO THE SCHOOL AUTHORITIES BY ONE OF THE STUDENT`** - **`ANNEXURE A6 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SUBMITTED TO THE SCHOOL AUTHORITIES BY ONE OF THE STUDENT`** - **`ANNEXURE A7 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SUBMITTED BY MOTHER OF ONE OF THE STUDENT`** - **`ANNEXURE A8 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SUBMITTED BY MOTHER OF ONE OF THE STUDENT`** - **`ANNEXURE A9 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SUBMITTED BY MOTHER OF ONE OF THE STUDENT`** - **`ANNEXURE A10 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 31.01.2023 ISSUED BY THE PARENTS OF THE STUDENTS`** - **`ANNEXURE A11 TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENTS EVIDENCING CONFERMENT NATIONAL AWARD TO THE 1ST PETITIONER`** - **`ANNEXURE A12 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 28.01.2023 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE ADMINISTRATION OFFICER OF THE SCHOOL`** - **`ANNEXURE A13 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.33/2023 DATED 13.01.2023 OF THE PAVARATTY POLICE STATION`** ``` CRL.MC NO. 1044 OF 2023 ``` ``` 11 ``` ``` ANNEXURE A14THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.33/2023 DATED 13.01.2023 OF THE PAVARATTY POLICE STATION ``` ``` RESPONDENTS ANNEXURES : NIL ```