Supreme Court of India on SC/ST Act, 1989

Syllabus: GS2/Vulnerable Section of Society

Context

Recently, the Supreme Court held in a judgement that not all insults and intimidatory comments aimed at a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe person would be an offence under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act).

The Untouchability (Offences) Act, 1955 was initially passed in Parliament to eradicate inherent discriminatory attitudes against the SCs and STs.
It was renamed as the Protection of Civil Rights (PCR) Act in 1976.
Later, owing to the ineffectiveness of the above acts, the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 came into existence.
According to the SC/ST Act, the protection is provided from social disabilities such as denial of access to certain places and to use a customary passage, personal atrocities like forceful drinking or eating of inedible food, sexual exploitation, injury, etc, and atrocities affecting properties, malicious prosecution, political disabilities, and economic exploitation.
The SC/ST Act is in place to deliver justice to the marginalised through proactive efforts, giving them a life of dignity, self-esteem, and a life without fear, violence, or suppression from the dominant castes.

Atrocities can be committed only by non-SCs and non-STs on members of the SC or ST communities.
- Crimes among or between SCs and STs do not come under the purview of this Act.
Cancellation of arms licences in the areas identified where an atrocity may take or has taken place and grant arms licences to the SCs and STs.

The Act was amended in 2015 to make it more effective and to provide greater justice and enhanced redressal to injustice suffered by the atrocity victims.
It includes new offences, expanded scope of presumptions, institutional strengthening, and establishment of Special Courts and Exclusive Special Courts to exclusively try offences under the SC/ST Act to enable expeditious disposal of cases.

Intent Matters: The court emphasised that the intention behind the insult or intimidation is crucial. Mere knowledge that the victim belongs to an SC/ST community is insufficient to invoke the provisions of the Act.
- Instead, the insult must be intentionally directed at the victim because of their caste identity.
Caste-Based Humiliation: To trigger the Act, the ‘humiliation’ inflicted by the aggressor must be intricately associated with the victim’s caste identity.
- In other words, it’s not every intentional insult that results in caste-based humiliation. The court clarified that this applies only in cases where the insult reinforces historically entrenched ideas, such as untouchability or notions of caste superiority.
The court recognised that insults or intimidation can occur without reference to caste. If the insult is not specifically tied to the victim’s SC/ST status, it does not fall under the purview of the Act.
Anticipatory Bail: It cannot be denied under Section 18 of the Act unless a prima facie case under the Act is established against the accused. It ensures that individuals are not unfairly deprived of their right to seek anticipatory bail.

Further Reading: Read our detailed article on Supreme Court of India: Composition, Appointment, Jurisdiction & More

Previous article China-Philippines Clash over South China Dispute

Next article BioE3 Policy