SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENT

STOP CHILD CRUELTY TRUST (SCCT)

SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT—LANDMARK VERDICT AGAINST CORPORAL PUNISHMENT

 
  • Case no: SC/FR/97/2017
  • Petitioned on: 7th March 2017
  • Argued on:17th September 2020
  • Decided on:12th February 2021 
The archaic attitude towards punishment of children of “spare the rod and spoil the child” prevails strongly
in Sri Lankan culture, indeed the saying used is, “නොගහා හදන ළමයයි, හැඳි නොගා හදන හොද්දයි වැඩක් නැත.”

(The child raised without beating and the curry made without stirring is useless). This view does not  essentially originate from Sri Lankan culture. In Sri Lanka, there is ample evidence in relation to laws introduced by kings in order to promote a non-violent, benevolent society, raising nurturing children. This is
the case of a 15 year old minor student who was slapped by the Teacher in Charge of Discipline/Art.
The petition was filed against the teacher (1st Respondent), the principal, and other relevant authorities in education.
 
 
 

View More
The Facts
 
The facts are such that on the 13th of February 2017, the petitioner attended school as usual. During the 1st and 2nd periods of the day allocated for Agriculture, the Petitioner was made part of  one of three groups in  the class and was directed to plow a designated area of the school grounds at the plant nursery to plant vegetables. The Petitioner, during the execution of this exercise, had felt fatigued and had sat on a half wall near the plant nursery for a short amount of time prior to resuming this activity. One of the classmates of the Child Petitioner had kept the Petitioner company during this time. Thereafter, the child petitioner had resumed the designated task following this short break. The Child Petitioner further states that while he was washing his hands and tools, two students had approached him and told him that the 1st Respondent asked him to come to his office. The 1st Respondent also admits to this and adds that on seeing the Child Petitioner seated on the culvert during the previous period, he had summoned him and reminded him that the principal had previously warned them not to sit on that specific culvert, as it was dangerous, and questioned him as to why he had done so even after the warning.
 
 
It is observed from the material submitted to this court that the Child Petitioner states that the 1st Respondent then questioned the Child Petitioner, asking, Where was it that you were sitting?” and slapped the Child Petitioner across the face. The petitioner states that the blow landed on his face, upon his left ear. The petitioner had felt excruciating, severe discomfort and been startled and disoriented. However, after the incident, the Child Petitioner had been chased out of the classroom by the 1st Respondent. The child petitioner had then been in his class and remained in excruciating pain. When the 1st Respondent was informed of the Child Petitioner’s situation, the 1st Respondent came to the Child Petitioner and said, “Don’t take it so seriously/ignore it.” Thereafter, the class teacher had been informed that the child petitioner wants to speak to her. The Child Petitioner states that when he had told her that the art teacher had hit him and stated that his ear was hurting and that he wanted to go home, the teacher had responded, saying, “It will pass. Now don’t go home and exaggerate it and tell your parents.
” 
  
The Child Petitioner had returned to his classroom, where the 1st Respondent had later returned with another teacher who spoke to the Child Petitioner and said, Tell me if it bleeds.” And further offered to get the child petitioner tea from the canteen. It must be noted that no staff member offered any form of medical assistance to the child petitioner. As no such assistance was forthcoming and he was not allowed to go home, the Child Petitioner had bought himself 2 Panadol pills as painkillers from the school canteen. It must further be noted that no staff member proceeded to inform the school principal of this incident prior to the principal being informed later in the day by a family member of the child petitioner before he was admitted to the hospital. After the child petitioner returned home from school at the end of the school day, he told his grandmother that the art teacher had slapped him and that his ear was aching. Thereafter, the child petitioner was taken to the rural hospital, and his ear was examined. The doctor has commented that there is eardrum damage, and it is recommended that the child petitioner be admitted to the General Hospital.

All Rights Reserved of Stop Child Cruelty © 2025 | Powered By