Current Affairs

Source: Allahabad High Court

Why in News?

Recently, the Allahabad High Court has held that an act intentional insult or intimidation to humiliate a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe would constitute an offence under Section 3(1)(r) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act) only if it is committed in public view.

• The aforesaid observation was given in the matter of Pintu Singh @ Rana Pratap Singh & Ors. v. State of U.P. and Anr.

What was the Background of Pintu Singh @ Rana Pratap Singh & Ors. v. State of U.P. and Anr. Case?

• In this case initially an FIR was lodged on 15^th November 2017 under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and 3(1)(r) of SC/ST Act at Police Station Nagara, District Ballia with the allegations that the nominated accused persons who are seven in number including the applicants have entered into the house of the informant and have stated caste based remark and have also assaulted the informant and his family members.
• Thereafter, an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) has been filed before the Allahabad High Court by applicants for quashing of the criminal proceedings.
• The learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicants are pressing the application in respect of the offence under section SC/ST Act. In respect of the other offences the applicants are not putting any challenge to the charge sheet at this stage.
• The learned counsel for the applicant submits that once the words uttered was not in public view nor it was in public place then provisions of Section 3(1) (r) of SC/ST Act would not be attracted.
• Partly allowing the application, the High Court quashed the proceedings in respect of Section 3 (1) (r) SC/ST Act.

What were the Court’s Observations?

• Justice Vikram D. Chauhan observed that one of the essential ingredients for an offence under section 3(1)(r) of SC/ST Act is that the offence ought to have been committed in public view. In the present case, the offence is not committed in public view, nor has the offence been committed at public place.
• The Court further observed that once the offence has not taken place in public view the provisions of Section 3(1)(r) of the SC/ST Act would not be attracted and as such the same cannot be proceeded with.

What is Section 3(1)(r) of the SC/ST Act?

About the SC/ST Act:

• SC/ST Act 1989 is an Act of Parliament enacted to prohibit discrimination against SC & ST communities members and prevent atrocities against them.
• The Act was passed in Parliament of India on 11^th September 1989 and notified on 30 January 1990.
• The Act is also a recognition of the depressing reality that despite undertaking several measures, the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes continue to be subjected to various atrocities at the hands of upper castes.
• The Act has been enacted keeping in view the express constitutional safeguards enumerated in Articles 15, 17 and 21 of the Constitution of India, 1950 (COI), with a twin-fold objective of protecting the members of these vulnerable communities as well as to provide relief and rehabilitation to the victims of caste-based atrocities.

SC/ST (Amendment) Act, 2015:

• This Act was amended in the year 2015 for the purpose of making the act more stringent with the following provisions:
  • Recognition was given to more instances of atrocities as crimes against SCs and STs.
  • It added several new offences in Section 3 and renumbered the entire section since the recognized crime almost doubled.
  • The Act added Chapter IVA Section 15A (the rights of victims and witnesses), and defined dereliction of duty by officials and accountability mechanisms more precisely.
  • It provided for the establishment of exclusive special courts and special public prosecutors.
  • In the context of public servants at all levels this Act defined the term willlful negligence.

SC/ST (Amendment) Act, 2018:

• In the case of Prithvi Raj Chauhan v. Union of India (2020), the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of Parliament’s 2018 Amendment to the Prevention of Atrocities Act. The Salient features of this Amendment Act are as follows:
  • It added Section 18A to the original Act.
  • It delineates specific crimes against Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes as atrocities and describes strategies and prescribes punishments to counter these acts.
  • It identifies what acts constitute “atrocities” and all offences listed in the Act are cognizable. The police can arrest the offender without a warrant and start an investigation into the case without taking any orders from the court.
  • The Act calls upon all the states to convert an existing sessions court in each district into a Special Court to try cases registered under it and provides for the appointment of Public Prosecutors/Special Public Prosecutors for conducting cases in special courts.
  • It creates provisions for states to declare areas with high levels of caste violence to be “atrocity-prone” and to appoint qualified officers to monitor and maintain law and order.
  • It provides for the punishment for willful neglect of duties by non-SC/ST public servants.
  • It is implemented by the State Governments and Union Territory Administrations, which are provided due central assistance.

Section 3(1)(r) of the SC/ST Act:

• Section 3 of this Act deals with punishments for offences atrocities.
• Section 3(1)(r) states that whoever, not being a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe intentionally insults or intimidates with intent to humiliate a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe in any place within public view shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than six months but which may extend to five years and with fine.