Corporal punishment alone cannot attract POCSO without sexual intent: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has ruled that inappropriate corporal punishment by a teacher, without the required sexual intent, cannot by itself constitute an offence under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

A bench of Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and Atul S Chandurkar made the observation while quashing proceedings against a West Bengal schoolteacher accused of physically punishing two Class 10 girls.

Teacher accused of hitting students

The teacher, who taught geography at a school in Alipurduar district, was accused of hitting the students on their back and waist when they failed to answer questions in class.

According to court records, women teachers informed the headmaster on June 24, 2025, that some Class 10 students had complained about being physically touched by the teacher. A meeting was held the following day, after which the District Child Protection Unit was informed.

An enquiry report alleged that the teacher had beaten the girls on their upper back when they were inattentive and slapped them on another occasion for not carrying their geography maps. The report also mentioned allegations of him rubbing one student's back, pinching her waist and touching another student's neck with his nails.

SC examines requirement of sexual intent

An FIR was registered on July 23, 2025, under Section 10 of the POCSO Act, which deals with aggravated sexual assault. The provision can apply when sexual assault is committed by certain persons, including staff members of an educational institution.

The Supreme Court noted that sexual assault under Section 7 requires physical contact accompanied by sexual intent.

Statements given by the two girls before a magistrate under Section 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), however, did not establish the required elements of a sexual offence, the court found.

The bench said the teacher’s conduct “may not be appropriate”, particularly his use of corporal punishment and his lack of sensitivity while dealing with girl students.

POCSO case quashed

The court said the teacher could have handled the situation “in a much more sensitive manner”, but held that the allegations did not amount to the sexual offence covered under Section 10.

“Inadequacy on the part of the appellant or resorting to corporal punishment would not attract Section 10 of the POCSO Act,” the bench said in its September 8 order.

The Supreme Court held that continuing the prosecution would amount to an abuse of the process of law and cause “extreme prejudice” to the teacher.

It consequently set aside the Calcutta High Court’s April 27 order and quashed the proceedings pending against the teacher before the special court at Alipurduar.