What is SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act? Key Facts Everyone Should Know

The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, is an Indian law designed to prevent crimes against members of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. 

It aims to protect these communities from discrimination and atrocities, ensuring their right to live with dignity. The Act specifies various offences, prescribes stringent punishments, and provides for special courts to expedite justice.

Recently, Senapathy Kris Gopalakrishnan, co-founder of Infosys, was booked under this act with 17 other members of the Indian Institute of Science (IISc). However, there is no response from IISc or K. Gopalakrishnan regarding the allegations made against them.

But, what exactly is the SC/CT Prevention of Atrocities Act? Let’s understand!

Check Out| Which Indian States Has the Most Hard Working Employees? Check Names as per the EAC Study

What is the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act?

The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, commonly known as the SC/ST Act, was enacted by the Parliament of India to address and prevent atrocities and hate crimes against members of Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs). 

The Act aims to provide legal protection to these marginalised communities, ensuring their dignity and safety from discrimination and violence.

Key Features of the Act

• Purpose: The Act is designed to prevent offences classified as "atrocities" against SCs and STs, which include a range of humiliations, violence, and discrimination based on caste and tribal identity.
• Legal Framework: It establishes Special Courts for the trial of offences committed against SCs and STs, ensuring swift justice for victims. The Act also mandates the relief and rehabilitation of those affected by such atrocities.
• Implementation: The Act requires regular monitoring by state authorities, including the Chief Minister and a High-Level State Vigilance and Monitoring Committee, which oversees its implementation.
• Amendments: The original legislation has undergone several amendments to enhance its provisions. Notably, it was amended in 2015 to strengthen protections for SCs and STs, with further adjustments made in 2018 and 2019.

For You| What is the Waqf Board Bill? What Were the Amendments Proposed?

What Are the Main Objectives of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act?

The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, aims to protect marginalised communities in India from discrimination and violence. Here are the main objectives of the Act:

• Prevention of Atrocities: The primary objective is to prevent offences classified as atrocities against members of Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) by individuals not belonging to these communities.
• Establishment of Special Courts: The Act provides for the creation of Special Courts to expedite the trial of offences committed against SCs and STs, ensuring that justice is delivered swiftly.
• Relief and Rehabilitation: It aims to provide relief and rehabilitation for victims of atrocities, addressing their immediate needs and supporting their reintegration into society.
• Recognition of Rights: The Act recognises the ongoing discrimination faced by SCs and STs, affirming their rights to live with dignity and self-esteem and without fear of violence or suppression from dominant castes.
• Monitoring and Implementation: The Act mandates regular monitoring by state authorities, including a High-Level State Vigilance and Monitoring Committee, to ensure effective implementation at both state and district levels.
• Affirmative Action: It emphasises affirmative action to empower SCs and STs, making them integral members of society while protecting their social, economic, democratic, and political rights.

In a short summary:

• The primary objectives of the SC/ST Act include:
• To deter acts of indignity, humiliation, and harassment against SCs and STs.
• To recognise the ongoing discrimination faced by these communities despite various constitutional safeguards.
• To provide a framework for justice that includes both punitive measures against offenders and support for victims.

You Might Like| What Do Different Colours in Passports Signify?

What Are the Penalties for Violating the SC/ST Act?

Violating the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act can result in severe penalties, which vary based on the nature of the offence. Here are the key provisions regarding penalties:

General Penalties

Minimum and Maximum Sentences:

• Most offences under the Act carry a minimum imprisonment of six months, which can extend up to five years or more, depending on the severity of the offence.
• For certain serious offences, such as those involving violence or assault against members of SC/ST communities, the punishment can be as severe as life imprisonment or even the death penalty in extreme cases.

Specific Offenses and Their Punishments:

• Forcible acts: Forcing a member of SC/ST to drink harmful substances or stripping them of their clothes can lead to imprisonment ranging from six months to seven years.
• Public Servants' Negligence: Public servants who wilfully neglect their duties under this Act face a minimum of six months to a maximum of one year in prison.
• False Legal Proceedings: Instituting false or malicious legal actions against SC/ST individuals can also lead to significant penalties, including imprisonment for up to five years.

Enhanced Punishment for Repeat Offenders:

Individuals previously convicted under this Act may face enhanced penalties for subsequent offences, which could involve longer terms of imprisonment, starting from one year and extending to the maximum provided for the specific offence.

Summary Table of Penalties

How Has the Sc/st Act Evolved Since Its Enactment in 1989?

The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, commonly referred to as the SC/ST Act, was enacted in India in 1989 to protect marginalised communities from discrimination and violence. 

Since its inception, the Act has undergone several amendments and judicial scrutiny, reflecting the evolving socio-legal landscape regarding caste-based atrocities.

Historical Context and Enactment

The SC/ST Act was passed on September 11, 1989, and came into effect on January 30, 1990. 

It aimed to address historical injustices faced by Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) by providing a legal framework that delineates specific offences against these communities. 

The Act establishes stringent penalties for acts of discrimination and violence based on caste or tribal identity, thereby promoting social justice and equality.

Major Amendments

2015 Amendment

In 2015, the Act was comprehensively amended to enhance its protective mechanisms. This amendment redefined certain offences and introduced provisions for the establishment of special courts to expedite the trial process for cases under the Act. 

It aimed to ensure that cases are resolved swiftly, ideally within two months of filing a First Information Report (FIR).

2018 Amendment

The 2018 amendment was particularly significant as it responded to a controversial Supreme Court ruling from March 2018 that allowed anticipatory bail for those accused under the Act. 

This ruling sparked widespread protests across India due to concerns that it would undermine the protections afforded to SCs and STs. In response, the government amended the Act to restore its original provisions, which bar anticipatory bail for such offences.

2019 Amendment

Further amendments in 2019 continued to refine the definitions of offences and enhance penalties for violations of the Act. These changes were part of an ongoing effort to adapt the law to contemporary challenges faced by marginalised communities.

Implementation Challenges

Despite these legislative efforts, implementation has faced significant hurdles. Reports indicate an increasing backlog of cases in courts; for instance, the number of pending cases rose from approximately 175,000 in 2018 to over 223,000 in 2020. 

Moreover, compliance with the rules established under the Act has been inconsistent across states, with only a few states fully implementing necessary measures such as establishing special police stations dedicated to handling SC/ST cases.

Judicial Interpretation

The judiciary has played a critical role in interpreting the SC/ST Act. While some rulings have reinforced protections for marginalised communities, others have raised concerns about misuse of the law. 

For example, there have been claims that the Act is sometimes used for personal vendettas or as a tool for extortion. This duality highlights ongoing debates about balancing protection against abuse of legal provisions.

What Are Some Landmark Cases Related to the SC/ST Act?

Landmark cases related to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, have played a significant role in shaping the legal landscape for the protection of marginalised communities in India. Here are some notable cases:

1) Swaran Singh and Anr. v. State of Punjab (2008)

This case emphasised the importance of proper investigation under the SC/ST Act. The Supreme Court expressed surprise that a conviction under the Act was set aside on technical grounds, highlighting that such hyper-technicalities should not undermine justice for victims of caste-based atrocities.

2) Arumugam Servai v. State of Tamil Nadu (2011)

The Supreme Court ruled that insulting a member of an SC/ST community constitutes an offence under the SC/ST Act, reinforcing the Act's protective measures against discrimination and harassment.

3) Kailas and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra (2011)

In this ruling, the Supreme Court criticised the High Court's decision to set aside a conviction under the SC/ST Act based on technicalities related to evidence submission, asserting that such grounds should not lead to acquittal.

4) Subhash Kashinath Mahajan v. State of Maharashtra (2018)

This case caused significant controversy as the Supreme Court introduced safeguards against misuse of the SC/ST Act, leading to widespread protests. The ruling stated that anticipatory bail could be granted in certain circumstances, which was met with backlash from Dalit groups.

5) Prithvi Raj Chauhan v. Union of India (2020)

The Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of the 2018 Amendment to the SC/ST Act, which aimed to strengthen protections against atrocities and clarify provisions regarding anticipatory bail and procedural safeguards for accused individuals45.

6) Bachu Das v. State of Bihar (2014)

The Supreme Court cancelled anticipatory bail granted by the High Court, emphasising that such bail is not permissible under Section 18 of the SC/ST Act if there is a prima facie case against the accused.

7) MP Mariappan v. Deputy Inspector General of Police (2014)

This case involved discrimination based on caste when a venue booking was denied due to the individual's Scheduled Caste status. The Supreme Court overturned an anticipatory bail order granted by the High Court, affirming strict adherence to the provisions of the SC/ST Act.

Infosys co-founder Kris Gopalakrishnan has recently been booked under the Prevention of SC/ST Atrocities Act, alongside former Indian Institute of Science (IISc) Director Balaram and 16 others.

The case was initiated following a complaint by Durgappa, a member of the tribal Bovi community and a former faculty member at the IISc. Durgappa alleged that he was wrongfully implicated in a honey trap case in 2014, which led to his dismissal from the institute.

He further claimed that he faced caste-based abuse and threats during his tenure at IISc, where Gopalakrishnan serves as a member of the Board of Trustees.

The complaint resulted in a case being registered at the Sadashiva Nagar police station in Bengaluru, following directives from the 71st city civil and sessions court.

The other individuals named in the case include several prominent figures associated with IISc and its administration. As of now, neither Gopalakrishnan nor the IISc faculty has publicly commented on the allegations.

What's Next| Waqf Amendment Bill Approved: Check Key Amendments and Other Details