Skip to main content

Corporal punishment in India

 CORPORAL PUNISHMENT IN INDIA

Punishing children has been seen to be a sure-fire way to raise responsible and disciplined children since the dawn of time. Children were raised to think that inflicting pain was an inevitable part of growing up, so they never suspected that their rights had been violated. Infliction of injury was portrayed as love and caring for the child's best interests, therefore most youngsters never felt compelled to report such instances. This article goes into great detail on the current state of Corporal Punishment in India.

From a purely physical perspective, the term 'Corporal Punishment' has now expanded to include mental punishment. Although physical forms of Corporal Punishment are mostly used on males, the other kind is also used on girls. Corporal Punishment is divided into three categories: physical, mental, and discriminatory punishment.

Physical Penalties:

1. Having the children stand like a wall chair (Goda Kurchee in Telugu), 2. Having the youngsters carry their school bags on their heads

3. Leaving them in the light for the entire day

4. Have the pupils kneel and complete the assignment before entering the classroom.

5. forcing them to sit on the bench

6. Getting them to raise their hands,

7. Stand with a pencil in their mouth.

8. With their hands passed beneath their legs, they hold their ears.

The children's hands are tied, and they are forced to do sit-ups (Gunjeelu),

Caning and pinching, as well as twisting the ears, are among the most common punishments (Chevulu pindadam)


Emotional Punishments: 1. The opposite sex slapping

2. Harassment, humiliation, and shaming

3. Label the youngster and send him or her throughout the classroom according to his or her misbehaviour.

4. Assign them to the rear of the class to do the job.

5. Putting them on hold for a few days

6. Pining paper to their backs with labels such as "I am a stupid," "I am a donkey," and so on.

7. The teacher humiliates the youngster in every lesson that she attends.

8. Taking the lads' shirts off.

Negative Recommendation

1. Detention at lunch and recess.

2. Isolating them in a room with no light.

3. Make a phone call to parents or ask the kids to bring explanation letters from their parents.

4. Keeping the kids beyond the gate or sending them home

5. Instructing the students to sit on the classroom floor.

6. Enforcing the youngster to tidy up after himself.

7. Insisting on the youngster running around the building or on the playground.

8. Taking the kids to the principal.

9. Instructing them in the classroom.

ten. requiring them to stand till the teacher arrives.

11. Providing verbal warnings as well as written cautions in the diary or calendar

12. Threatening to give the youngster TC if he or she does not comply.

13. Requesting that they refrain from participating in games or other activities.

14. Marks deducted

15. Treating three late arrivals as though they were one absent.

16. Putting an excessive amount of pressure on someone.

17. Impose penalties on the youngsters.

18. Refusing to let them inside the lesson.

19. Sitting for a length of time, a day, a week, or a month on the floor.

20. Marking their discipline charts with black marks.


Children are required to be protected by law and legal systems against abuse by authorities, whether at home, in schools, or in justice administration systems, taking into account their age, innocence, and inability to understand. Children under the age of seven are not subject to criminal responsibility. Their action is not considered a crime at all. This indicates that no corporal punishment is permissible, even under punitive rules based on the doli incapaxi principles.  Section 83 of the IPC grants a similar exception to children aged seven and younger who have an underdeveloped comprehension. In essence, due to their age and inability to formulate a harmful purpose, a kid cannot be subjected to traditional physical penalties such as incarceration for the offences. As a result, being a student who has made a mistake like as not doing homework or breaching a dress code should not result in physical punishment.


Section 88 of the Indian Penal Code protects a conduct done by consent in good faith for the benefit of another person that is not intended to cause death. This provision applies to a master who is chastising a student. This clause protects a head teacher who applies a moderate and reasonable physical punishment to a child in good faith to maintain school discipline, and such an act is not a criminal under Section 323.


A guardian's or guardian's permission to an act done in good faith for the welfare of a child under the age of 12 is protected under Section 89 of the Indian Penal Code. The same law, however, states that this exception does not apply to causing death, or attempting to cause death, or inflicting grave harm. With exceptions, these regulations apply to instructors with quasi-parental power, i.e., assent or delegation of authority from parents. Excessive force, significant harm, or a goal that is irrational can transform a guardian's or teacher's act with the approval of the guardian into a crime, because such instances fall outside the boundaries of good faith.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
Post a Comment
Read more