Delhi High Court Quashes FIR Against Teacher For Slapping 3-Yr-Old Who Failed To Recite 'ABCD'

The Delhi High Court has recently quashed an FIR against a teacher who allegedly slapped a three-year-old child who failed to recite “ABCD” after the parties entered into a settlement.

Quashing the FIR filed by the minor's mother in 2015, Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta said that the complainant and the teacher intend to put a quietus to the case which arose over a “minor issue” and has been pending for a period of 9 years.

“The settlement shall promote harmony between the parties and permit them to move forward in life. Also the chances of conviction are bleak in view of amicable settlement between the parties. Further, no past involvement of the petitioner has been brought to the notice of this Court,” the court said.

However, it underscored that corporal punishment to a child in any form is deprecable, even though the motive may be to make a child realise that his or her act is unacceptable, wrong or disappointing.

“United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child also provides that appropriate measures need to be taken to ensure that school discipline should be administered in a manner consistent with the child dignity and no child shall be subjected to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment,” the court said.

Justice Mendiratta quashed the FIR registered under Section 23 (Punishment for cruelty to juvenile or child) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, and Section 323 (Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt) and 506 (Punishment for criminal intimidation) of Indian Penal Code, 1860.

The FIR alleged that the mother found injury marks on the face of the minor child, who, upon enquiry, told her that the teacher slapped him as he was unable to recite Alphabets 'ABCD'.

The plea for quashing the FIR was moved by the teacher on the ground that the matter was settled between him and the complainant's mother in March.

It was her case that neither there was any intention on his part to inflict any harm or injury to the minor nor any such visible mark was recorded in the MLC, except bruises over the left cheek and right cheek.

The mother told the court that the matter was amicably settled between the parties and that the FIR was lodged on the information given by the child.

Observing that the statement of the victim was not recorded till the filing of the chargesheet, the court said:

“The investigating agency never took the aid of a child psychologist/counsellor for the purpose of even ascertaining, if the child aged about three and a half years was in a position to correctly disclose the reason for a bruise on his face. The Chargesheet merely proceeded on the statement of the mother of 'X' on assumption.”

Title: SUMAN VIJAY v. STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 870

Click here to read order