Principal insisting students to wear school uniform not cruelty under Juvenile Justice Act: Kerala High Court

A school principal insisting that students should wear school uniforms does not amount to “cruelty against children” under Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (JJ Act), the Kerala High Court recently held [xxx v State of Kerala & anr].

Justice A Badharudeen, observed that Section 75 of the JJ Act deals with cruelty to children, including acts that cause unnecessary mental or physical suffering.

However, requiring students to wear uniforms is a standard disciplinary practice that does not inflict such harm, the Court made it clear.

"When a teacher insists for wearing uniform, on seeing a student, who reached the school in colour dress, the same is intended for the purpose of maintaining the discipline of the school in the matter of uniform dress code, and the same, in no way, could be held as as an act, which would cause unnecessary mental or physical suffering to the child, so as to attract the offence under Section 75 of the JJ Act," the judge added.

Hence, it quashed a case against the principal of Bharathiya Vidya Bhavan School in Thrissur.

The case arose when an eighth standard student visited the school during vacation to collect her academic results and buy books. She was wearing casual clothes instead of her uniform, assuming that the dress code was not in place during vacation.

The school principal reprimanded the student for not wearing her uniform, commenting on her physique and sent her home to change into uniform. Following this, a criminal case was filed against the principal under Section 75 of the JJ Act.

The principal then moved the High Court to quash the case, arguing that no prima facie offence under the JJ Act had been made out against her.

The counsel for the principal argued that the case filed against her was an act of retaliation, as the student's mother who worked in the same school, had been issued a memo regarding her negligence during examination duty shortly before the incident.

After reviewing the records, the Court concluded that no prima facie case of cruelty was made out against the principal.

It quashed the case, warning that interpreting routine disciplinary actions as cruelty could harm a school's discipline and overall functioning.

"If, as part of maintenance of the discipline of the school when wearing of uniform dress is made mandatory, it is the duty of the students to obey the same, so as to keep the dignity and discipline of the school to impart education effectively. If such acts are given the colour of an offence under Section 75 of the JJ Act, the discipline of the school would become topsy-turvy and the same would disdainfully affect the discipline and the regiment of the school. Therefore, such disciplinary measures cannot be ushered into the purview of Section 75 of the JJ Act," the Court ruled.

Senior counsel P Vijaya Bhanu along with advocates KR Arun Krishnan, PM Rafiq, M Revikrishnan, Ajeesh K Sasi, Mitha Sudhindran, Sruthy KK, Sruthy N Bhat and Rahul Sunil appeared for the principal.

The State was represented by Senior public prosecutor Renjit George.

The student was represented by advocate KR Arun Krishnan.

[Read Order]