Apr 29, 2009 
There was a time when being rapped on the knuckles, being made to run around the school grounds, kneeling down, standing in the sun for hours, being hit with a ruler, pinched and slapped were acceptable forms of disciplining a wayward schoolchild. But is this form of discipline acceptable? The death of Shannoo Khan, a Class II student at a Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) school, after being allegedly punished by her class teacher has again stirred a hornet’s nest as to whether corporal punishment should be banned in schools. Of the 28 Indian states and seven union territories only seven — Uttar Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, Chandigarh, Goa and Delhi — have banned corporal punishment. Yet intermittent cases of children being hurt by punishment crop up in these states from time to time.
A study by the United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund (Unicef), Save the Children — an organisation that fights for children’s rights in India and the Union ministry of women and child development found that 65 per cent of schoolgoing children in India reported facing corporal punishment. This means that two of three schoolchildren are victims of corporal punishment at some point of time. Revealingly, 62 per cent of the victims of corporal punishment were students in government and municipal schools. “The government has not done much to protect children. What exist in the name of law are government orders,” says Shireen Vakil Miller, director, advocacy and policy, Save the Children.
How far do the laws of this land protect a school child from the wrath of authority figures in school? Article 89 of the Indian Penal Code (1860) states that “nothing which is done in good faith for the benefit of a person under twelve years of age, or of unsound mind, by or by consent, either express or implied, of the guardian or other person having lawful charge of that person, is an offence by reason of any harm which it may cause, or be intended by the doer to cause or be known by the doer to be likely to cause to that person”.
Says Shanta Sinha, chairperson, National Commission for the Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR), “Article 89 of the IPC needs to be repealed as it provides protection to the adult rather than the child. Changes in the IPC are required so that it is in consonance with the Supreme Court order of 2000 against administration of corporal punishment in schools.”
While Section 89 protects adults from the consequences of their actions, no law protects children from corporal punishment. Yes, the government has issued instructions to states to stop corporal punishment in schools, but it has managed to pass only the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, in this regard. Clause 23 of Chapter II of the Act states, “Whoever, having the actual charge of, or control over, a juvenile or the child, assaults, abandons, exposes or wilfully neglects the juvenile or causes or procures him to be assaulted, abandoned, exposed or neglected in a manner likely to cause such juvenile or the child unnecessary mental or physical suffering shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or fine, or with both.”
“Even if a teacher is booked under this act, he or she can be let off with a fine of a few thousands,” says New Delhi-based social jurist Ashok Agarwal. Not good enough. “We need a law to mete out punishment to the guilty teacher or authority.”
Of course, the National Policy on Education (1986, modified in 1992) states that “corporal punishment will be firmly excluded from the educational systems” (Section 5.6). In December 2000, the Delhi High Court ruled that the provisions for corporal punishment in the Delhi School Education Act (1973) were inhumane and detrimental to the dignity of children. Prohibition and elimination of corporal punishment in schools have been identified as priorities in the 2005 National Plan of Action for Children as well as the report on child protection in the National Plan for 2007-2012. The NCPCR has also recommended the abolition of corporal punishment in schools while the Supreme Court clearly said in 2000 that it should be seen that “children are not subjected to corporal punishment in schools and that they receive education in an environment of freedom and dignity, free from fear”. In 2007, NCPCR issued some guidelines for school managements which said corporal punishment should include slapping, rap on the knuckles, kneeling down for hours, running on the school grounds, hitting with a scale, pinching and being locked in a classroom for hours. But most schools have not paid heed to such guidelines. Despite the best efforts of the Supreme Court and NCPCR, schemes related to school children are easily ignored as they are not supported or enforceable by law.
The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Bill, 2008, which was recently tabled in Parliament includes a clause that no child shall be subject to physical punishment or mental harassment. Officials who contravene this provision shall be liable for disciplinary action under the applicable service rules. The bill is yet to be passed.
“We need a national law banning all forms of corporal punishment in schools,” says Vakil Miller. Calcutta High Court advocate Protik Prokash Banerjee, however, feels that there is no need for national legislation banning corporal punishment. “The old saying that spare the rod, spoil the child is universally true. What is needed is a gradation that punishment leading to mental or bodily harm won’t be allowed. A blanket ban would make children difficult to discipline.” Agrees T.H. Ireland, principal, St James School, Calcutta, “There are always pros and cons of any law.”
“Having a law isn’t enough. There should be rules for its implementation,” says Sinha. Agrees Siddhartha Misra whose daughter studies in South Point School, Calcutta, “Even if there is a national law, the situation won’t improve unless there is a governing body to ensure the implementation of the law.” Sinha feels that parents’ associations should conduct dialogues between school authorities and parents about corporal punishment as most parents don’t speak up about the subject fearing that their children would be further victimised.
Nishit Kumar, head, communication and strategic initiatives, CHILDLINE India Foundation, a non governmental organisation (NGO) that works for child rights, feels that instead of a blanket ban, a change in the governance pattern in schools is the solution to the issue. “Schools should have a child protection policy with a few non-negotiable clauses inserted by the government and local NGOs,” he says.
“What is needed is an alternative mechanism that will give teachers the scope to punish a child for bad conduct even while protecting the child from corporal punishment,” says Ireland. St James, for example, has now introduced discipline as a part of the curriculum. A child failing to secure pass marks in discipline will not be promoted to the next class.
It is time other schools came up with innovative ways to maintain discipline and ensure that a child is treated with the dignity he or she deserves.
Comment