Amrinder Singh Pannu

Introduction

Amrinder Singh Pannu was a teacher of science and head of science at St Mark’s Church of England Academy in Mitcham, where he had worked since September 2015. On 10 September 2018 a pupil recorded him in his classroom during a free period complimenting her body, discussing his penis, and agreeing to have sex with her a few months after she turned 18. The recordings reached the school by anonymous whistleblowing email the next day; he was suspended, and the matter was eventually referred to the Teaching Regulation Agency. A professional conduct panel found every allegation proved in September 2025, and on 26 September 2025 the Secretary of State’s decision maker prohibited him from teaching indefinitely, with no review period and no entitlement to apply for restoration.

Background Information

Pannu commenced employment at St Mark’s Church of England Academy, Mitcham on 1 September 2015, and at the time of the allegations was employed as a teacher of science / head of science. Earlier in his time at the school he had served as pastoral lead, and in early 2016 was asked to become involved in the issues surrounding Pupil A — a history the panel later weighed when assessing the influence he held over her. The school investigated after his suspension, and the matter was referred to the TRA on 10 October 2019.

The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation

Allegations. The claims in this section are findings of a Teaching Regulation Agency professional conduct panel, which reported substantiating them on the balance of probabilities. Pannu made no admissions of fact before the hearing and was neither present nor represented at it; through his then legal advisers he denied any inappropriate relationship with Pupil A or any sexual acts between them and denied his conduct was sexually motivated, and the panel found the allegations proved anyway.

On 10 September 2018 Pupil A recorded a conversation between herself and Pannu in his classroom during a free period. She later explained that she made the three recordings because a friend had not believed what she had been telling her about the situation and asked her to prove it, and that she considered herself to be in a relationship with him. What the panel found in the recordings was stark: when Pupil A said “I don’t have a big arse”, Pannu replied “no but it’s a nice arse”; told “I’m just teasing you”, he answered “you’re not teasing me, I know you want it”; after she spoke about his penis he said “just have it, just have it init, just the way you have your tits”. He told her “if you were in a different school then it would have been a different story”, said “you’re one horny girl man; fuck…”, asked “so you could do me round the corner?”, and when she asked “so when I turn 18 you’ll have sex with me right?” he said “a few months then later yeah”.

On 11 September 2018, three members of staff received an anonymous whistleblowing email attaching the voice recordings, setting out that the conversation was sexually explicit. Pannu was suspended and the school investigated. Confronted with the recordings, he denied it was him speaking, though the panel accepted evidence this was obvious; during the formal investigation he acknowledged it was him and that Pupil A had been flirtatious and he flirtatious in response. In a 2021 response through his lawyers, with an attached “reflection piece”, he accepted the conversation was handled badly by him and contained sexual references, but claimed he neither instigated nor encouraged its sexual nature and denied flirting. He admitted he never reported it to the safeguarding lead and accepted it was a safeguarding issue.

The panel convened virtually on 22 and 23 September 2025 and listened to the three recordings, the voices being not in dispute. It found allegations 1(a) through 1(g) proved, and found allegation 2 proved as well: the conduct was of a sexual nature and sexually motivated, his intention being the pursuance of sexual gratification and/or a sexual relationship with Pupil A. It rejected his assertion that his answers were attempts to end the conversation, finding his tone “often appeared to be a consensual, flirtatious and encouraging one”, and his occasional calls for restraint more about his fears of being discovered than any genuine attempt to protect the child. The panel was satisfied the conduct amounted to unacceptable professional conduct and conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute, finding breaches of the Teachers’ Standards and of Keeping Children Safe in Education, and behaviours associated with the offence of sexual communication with a child — sexually motivated conduct with a child under his care. His written position showed “the beginnings of remorse but not meaningful remorse”, and the panel was extremely concerned that there was a serious risk his conduct would be repeated with another pupil. It recommended a prohibition order with immediate effect and no review period.

Public Reaction and Consequences

On 26 September 2025 David Oatley, deciding on behalf of the Secretary of State, concluded that a prohibition order was proportionate and in the public interest, that no review period was necessary to maintain public confidence, and that Pannu shall not be entitled to apply for restoration of his eligibility to teach. No criminal proceedings appear anywhere in the published decision; the school’s safeguarding investigation and the TRA process carried the case instead.

Current Status

Pannu is prohibited from teaching indefinitely, the decision having been made on 26 September 2025 following the panel’s determination of 23 September 2025, and the order takes effect from service: he cannot teach in any school, sixth form college, relevant youth accommodation or children’s home in England, and shall not be entitled to apply for restoration of his eligibility to teach. His right of appeal to the High Court, which ran for 28 days from notice of the order, has long since lapsed. The published decision stands as the permanent public record any employer check will surface.

Impact on Their Career/Life

A teaching career that began in September 2015 ended with his suspension in September 2018 and was formally closed out seven years later by a lifetime ban. Because the bar covers not just schools but sixth form colleges, relevant youth accommodation and children’s homes, and because there is no review period and no route to restoration, his exclusion from English education is total. The finding that hangs over the record is the panel’s conclusion that a head of science engaged in sexually motivated conduct with a pupil in his care and never reported it through any safeguarding protocol — it came to light only because of a whistleblower.

Sources

• Teaching Regulation Agency, “Mr Amrinder Singh Pannu: Professional conduct panel hearing outcome” — panel decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State, published 2025. source