A Child Has Right to Life, Corporal Punishment Not Justified: HC Refuses to Quash Suicide Abetment Case

Corporal punishment is inconsistent with a child’s right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, causing harm to the physical and mental health of the child, the High Court of Chhattisgarh recently held. The court noted that “imposition of corporal punishment on the child is not in consonance with his right to life guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution of India”. Subjecting the child to corporal punishment for reforming him cannot be part of education as it causes incurable harm to body and mind.” The HC delved into the meaning of ‘Right to Life’, highlighting that this right encompasses more than mere animal survival, extending to a dignified existence free from cruelty and abuse. The Court also referred to established precedents and international conventions and stated that“the Convention on the Rights of the Child which in clear terms cast an obligation on the state party to take all appropriate legislative, administrative, social and educational measures to protect the child from all forms of physical or mental violence, injury or abuse, maltreatment, torture, inhuman or degrading treatment, exploitation including sexual abuse while in the care of the parent, legal guardian or any other person who are in the care of the child.” The court highlighted that corporal punishment, if proven, would be inconsistent with a child’s right to a dignified life under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, concluding that the allegations in the FIR warranted further investigation.