Miss Amani Choudhury

The Secretary of State does not make these decisions themselves. They are made by a senior official on the recommendation of an independent panel.

Teacher's name: Miss Amani Choudhury

Location teacher worked: Middlesex, Greater London

Date of professional conduct panel: 10 March 2026 to 13 March 2026

Outcome type: No order made

Notice is hereby given that, in accordance with The Teacher's’ Disciplinary (England) Regulations 2012, a professional conduct panel was convened to consider the case of Miss Amani Choudhury formerly employed in Middlesex, Greater London.

Teacher misconduct

Ground Floor, South

Cheylesmore House

5 Quinton RoadCoventryCV1 2WT

Email TRA.Casework@education.gov.uk

Telephone 020 7593 5393

Information about regulating the teaching profession and the process for dealing with serious teacher misconduct.

Miss Amani Choudhury: Professional conduct panel hearing outcome Panel decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State for Education March 2026 2 Contents Introduction 3 Allegations 4 Summary of evidence 5 Documents 5 Witnesses 5 Decision and reasons 6 Findings of fact 6 Panel’s recommendation to the Secretary of State 25 Decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State 31 3 Professional conduct panel decision and recommendations, and decision on behalf of the Secretary of State Teacher: Miss Amani Choudhury TRA reference: 23932 Date of determination: 13 March 2026 Former employer: Alec Reed Academy, Bengarth Road, Middlesex Introduction A professional conduct panel (“the panel”) of the Teaching Regulation Agency (“the TRA”) convened on 10 to 13 March 2026 by way of a virtual hearing, to consider the case of Miss Amani Choudhury. The panel members were Mr Carl Lygo (lay panellist – in the chair), Ms Aruna Sharma MBE (teacher panellist) and Mr Philip Jolowicz (lay panellist). The legal adviser to the panel was Miss Rebecca Hughes of Birketts LLP solicitors. The presenting officer for the TRA was Mr Alex Mullen, Counsel instructed by Kingsley Napley LLP solicitors. Miss Choudhury was present and was not represented. The hearing took place in public, save those parts which were heard in private, and was recorded. 4 Allegations The panel considered the allegations set out in the notice of proceedings dated 11 December 2025. It was alleged that Miss Choudhury was guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute, in that whilst working as a religious studies teacher at The Alec Reed Academy (‘the School’): 1. Between around November 2023 and February 2024, she: a) shared her personal mobile number with at least one pupil; b) shared her social media contact details with at least one pupil; c) followed at least one pupil on Instagram; and d) exchanged messages over text and/or WhatsApp and/or social media with at least one pupil. 2. In relation to her conduct at allegation 1(d) she told at least one pupil to delete the messages(s). 3. On or around 8 February 2024: a) she did not stop and/or intervene when Colleague A drove Pupil A and/or Pupil T to their place of work and/or home whilst she was a passenger in the car; and b) whilst in the car, as referred to above, she put and/or attempted to put her head on and/or near Pupil A’s shoulders. 4. In relation to the incident at allegation 3, she: a) did not report and/or inform a member of the School safeguarding team of this; b) contacted Pupil A and/or Pupil T in an attempt to interfere with their version of events. 5. Her conduct at allegation 2 and/or 4(a) and/or 4(b) was dishonest and/or lacked integrity. 5 Miss Choudhury orally admitted the facts of allegations 1(a), 1(d), 2, 3(a), 4(a) and 5 at the hearing. Miss Choudhury also admitted, in respect of those admitted facts, that her conduct amounted to unacceptable professional conduct and conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute. Summary of evidence Documents In advance of the hearing, the panel received a bundle of documents which included: Section 1: Chronology, list of key people and anonymised pupil list – pages 5 to 7 Section 2: Notice of hearing and response – pages 8 to 14 Section 3: Witness statements – pages 15 to 34 Section 4: TRA documents – pages 35 to 346 Section 5: Teacher’s representations – pages 347 to 381 In addition, the panel agreed to accept the following: • A chain of emails between Witness A and others at the School in February 2024 – 382 to 387 The panel members confirmed that they had read all of the documents within the bundle, in advance of the hearing and the additional document that the panel decided to admit. Witnesses The panel heard oral evidence from the following witnesses called by the presenting officer: Witness A Pupil N Miss Choudhury was present and therefore gave oral evidence. 6 Decision and reasons In considering this case, the panel had regard to the document “Teacher misconduct: Disciplinary procedures for the teaching profession 2020” (the “Procedures”). The panel announced its decision and reasons as follows: The panel carefully considered the case before it and reached a decision. On 1 September 2023, Miss Choudhury commenced employment as a religious studies teacher at the School. Miss Choudhury was an Early Career Teacher (“ECT”) in her second year. It was alleged that Miss Choudhury gave her personal mobile number to Pupil N. On 2 February 2024, Miss Choudhury allegedly travelled in a car with Colleague A and two sixth-form pupils, Pupil A and Pupil T, who were driven off-site without authorisation. She allegedly did not report this to the School. In early February 2024, further allegations were made that Miss Choudhury had contacted pupils via multiple social media platforms, including Instagram and TikTok. On 9 February 2024, the School suspended Miss Choudhury. On 28 March 2024, an investigation meeting took place. On 23 May 2024, the School held a disciplinary hearing into the allegations. On 29 May 2024, the School informed Miss Choudhury that her employment was terminated. On 13 June 2024, the School formally referred the matter to the TRA. Findings of fact The findings of fact are as follows: In respect of all the allegations, the panel carefully considered the oral and written witness evidence and exhibits. The panel scrutinised the entire bundle, including the TRA’s documents concerning the investigations and the meetings at the School. The panel noted that the evidence within many of these documents was hearsay from pupils. The panel had admitted the hearsay evidence after careful consideration in each case but noted that the evidence should be considered carefully and cautiously, including in relation to the appropriate amount of weight to be placed on it. 7 The panel noted that Miss Choudhury had admitted to large parts of the allegations facing her, but as some elements of those allegations were denied or not fully admitted, it proceeded on the basis that this was a fully disputed hearing and determined that it would carefully consider all the evidence before it. The panel found Miss Choudhury to be a credible witness. The panel noted she openly acknowledged shortcomings in her evidence, which the panel considered enhanced her overall credibility. The panel noted that her presentation was natural and unforced and did not appear rehearsed or over‑crafted. The panel also considered the definition of “social media” for the purposes of these proceedings. In doing so, the Panel noted the Cambridge English Dictionary definition of social media as: • “Websites and computer programs that allow people to communicate and share information, opinions, pictures, videos, etc. on the internet, especially social networking websites.” The panel considered whether any social media messages had been exchanged and, in that context, whether WhatsApp constituted social media. The panel noted that, within the TRA’s own categorisation of communications set out in the allegations, WhatsApp messages were treated separately from social media. The panel concluded that, for the purposes of these proceedings, WhatsApp should not be treated as social media. The panel noted that WhatsApp messages are exchanged privately and are not public facing. In addition, the panel considered it relevant that WhatsApp communications are identifiable by reference to a phone number rather than an accessible profile. Accordingly, and in the context of the issues before it, the panel treated WhatsApp messages as distinct from social media. The panel found the following particulars of the allegations against you proved, for these reasons: 1. Between around November 2023 and February 2024, you: a) shared your personal mobile number with at least one pupil; d) exchanged messages over text and/or WhatsApp and/or social media with at least one pupil. The panel noted that Miss Choudhary was employed by the School from 1 September 2023 and was suspended in February 2024. The panel noted that, in the response to the notice of proceedings dated 14 January 2026, and in her oral evidence, Miss Choudhury admitted these allegations. 8 Notwithstanding this, the panel proceeded to consider the evidence in front of it before making a finding. The panel noted screenshots of messages contained in the bundle before it between Miss Choudhury and Pupil N, in which Miss Choudhury wrote “I know you guys have issues with him but idk how the comments came to light”, “He’s really annoyed and upset cuz he feels like people are spreading rumours about him when it wasn’t true” and “Could you tell me who told you what he said.” The panel noted that both Pupil N and Miss Choudhury accepted that the screenshots of messages contained in the bundle were messaged between themselves. The panel considered the oral evidence and written statement of Pupil N dated 15 March 2025, who stated that Miss Choudhury asked for her phone number in October 2023 because she had been absent and that she gave it to her. She stated that Miss Choudhury messaged her about schoolwork such as links to homework and asking if she [REDACTED] and that she did not have screenshots of these messages because Miss Choudhury made her delete them. She stated that on 7 February 2024, while she was on her way home, Miss Choudhury messaged her on WhatsApp accusing her of gossiping and spreading rumours about her and Pupil A. She stated that later that afternoon, Miss Choudhury sent a further message asking her to delete her phone number and the record of their conversations, stating “head is onto me”, and that she deleted the messages because she was told to and then b