The Chhattisgarh High Court has condemned the use of physical violence against children in schools, describing it as inhumane, while dismissing a petition from a teacher accused of contributing to a student's suicide.

The court's remarks came in the context of a case involving Sister Mercy, also known as Elizabeth Jose, a teacher at Carmel Convent School in Ambikapur, Surguja District. An FIR was filed in February at the Manipur police station, alleging that Jose played a role in the suicide of a sixth-grade student, according to the petitioner's lawyer, Rajat Agrawal.

In their July 29 ruling, Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, part of the division bench, emphasized that corporal punishment is incompatible with a child's right to life under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. The bench rejected Jose's petition to dismiss both the FIR and the chargesheet related to the case.

"On a larger canvass right to life includes all that which gives meaning to life and makes it wholesome and worth living. It means something more than survival or animal existence. Right to life enshrined in Article 21 also embraces any aspect of life which makes it dignified," the court said.

"Being small does not make a child a less human being than a grown-up... It is cruel to subject the child to physical violence in school in the name of discipline or education. A child being a precious national resource is to be nurtured and attended with tenderness and care and not with cruelty. Subjecting the child to corporal punishment for reforming him cannot be part of education," the court order further stated.

Jose was arrested following the discovery of a suicide note in which the child explicitly named her. According to the petitioner's lawyer, on the day of the incident, Jose had only reprimanded the student and confiscated her ID card as part of the standard disciplinary measures typically enforced at the school.

"The petitioner never had any intention to abet the suicide of the student. Police, without conducting any preliminary inquiry, registered an FIR against the petitioner based solely on the basis of the suicide note," Jose's counsel submitted.

The state counsel contested the petition to dismiss the chargesheet and FIR, arguing that testimony from the victim's classmates, recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), indicated that Jose's conduct was so severe that it caused significant mental distress among the students.

In rejecting the petition, the court noted that it could not assess the defense of the accused or evaluate the merits of the case by weighing the evidence presented at this stage.

"The disputed questions of facts in the case cannot be adjudged and adjudicated at this stage while exercising powers under Section 528 of the BNSS (Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita) and only the prima facie prosecution case has to be looked into as it is. Evidence needs to be led to substantiate the defence of the accused," the court said.

The court does not find any ground to quash the chargesheet and FIR against the petitioner, it said.