Bombay HC: Prosecution under SC & ST (Atrocities) Act is liable to be quashed if caste of the complainant or the accused is not mentioned in the complaint

The learned Counsel for the applicant had relied on a decision of this Court reported in MANU/MH/0877/2005 : 2005(4)MhLj588 , Manohar Kulkarni v. State of Maharashtra. This Court has made the following observations.

It is a precondition that person committing the alleged offence must not be belonging to Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes. In the report filed in the Police Station, there ought to have been some averment indicating that the offender does not belong to Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes. In the absence of such averment or any other material before the Police Station Officer for coming to the conclusion that the accused named in the said report does not belong to Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes, the offence under Section 3 of the Atrocities Act cannot be registered.

It is apparent from this observations of this Court that the F.I.R. should not only disclose the caste of the complainant but it must also disclose the caste of the accused. If we go through the F.I.R., copy of which has been filed on record of this case, it would be clear that the report does disclose the caste of the complainant but it does not disclose the caste of the offender at all. The learned Counsel for the complainant/respondent No. 2 submitted that when the caste of the complainant itself is disclosed and it is alleged that he was abused on the basis of the caste, he is the person who does not belong to scheduled caste. Such an inference cannot be drawn. He also submitted that even if name of the complainant is seen, he does not belong to scheduled caste. Even such an inference cannot be drawn. The surnames in the State of Maharashtra is very deceptive. For instance, surnames Athawale, Abhyankar are to be found amongst Brahmins and such surnames are also to be found amongst scheduled castes. It cannot, therefore, be said that the surname can be a guide to find a caste of any particular person. It is particularly for this reason that it becomes necessary that the caste of the offender must also be disclosed in the complaint. In this particular case, the caste of the complainant is not disclosed in the complaint and yet the offence has been registered by the police. This Court in Manohar Kulkarni's case has specifically held that in no case the Police Officer can register an offence if caste of the complainant or the accused is not mentioned in the complaint. {Para 4}

8. Since I am bound by the decision in Manohar Kulkarni's case, I must hold that the F.I.R. under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act needs to be quashed. Hence, the following order. The petition is allowed to the extent that the F.I.R. registered under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act stands quashed.

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY (NAGPUR BENCH)

Cri. Appln. No. 1877 of 2007

Decided On: 04.10.2007

Prakash Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

C.L. Pangarkar, J.

Citation:  MANU/MH/1127/2007,2008(1) MHLJ 139,2008(2) Crimes 168.

Print Page

Bombay HC: When abuses in the name of caste is given inside the house, offence under SC & ST (Atrocities) Act is not attracted

 We would like to deal with the allegations against accused Almas and Pappu @ Irfan Shaikh. Accused Almas is the wife of accused Rijwan and Pappu @ Irfan is the brother of accused Rijwan. As aforesaid, the initial report was only against accused Rijwan and, therefore, the offence was registered only under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 of Indian Penal Code against him. But then on the basis of said supplementary statement of which major contents have been reproduced earlier, we will have to consider where the role of accused Almas and Pappu Shaikh has been described. As per the said FIR, accused Almas came in picture after marriage between Rijwan and informant on 15.07.2022. She says that after they both started residing together at a different place, accused Almas used to go there in the house and used to abuse her by saying that she is not Muslim, but of the inferior caste and, therefore, she should give divorce to her husband. Here, the alleged abuse is stated to be inside the house and, therefore, it cannot be considered as a public place and not even within the public view to attract Section 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Atrocities Act. It is not stated in the supplementary statement as to who had heard those abuses. If the informant and the said accused Almas were the only person present in the house, then it will not even attract Section 3(2)(va) of the Atrocities Act. Thereafter it is stated that the informant had gone to the house of Rijwan two to three days after 26.07.2022. Rijwan's house is situated in Kanjar Lane, Sadar Bazar, Bhingar, Tq. and Dist. Ahmednagar. In the said house, she was beaten by accused Almas and abused in the name of caste. It is then stated that at the same time accused Pappu Shaikh, who was present in front of the house of Rijwan as well as accused Altaf, who is nephew, abused her in the name of caste. She has not stated exact where the incident has taken place, but since she was inside the house when accused Almas has abused her in the name of caste, there is a scope to consider that the alleged abuses by the other two accused i.e. Pappu @ Irfan and his son Altaf were also inside the house. At the cost of repetition it can be said that these statements taken as it is will not attract Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) much less Section 3(2)(va) of the Atrocities Act. Police have also invoked Section 3(1)(w)(i), 3(1)(w)(ii) of the Atrocities Act, but they cannot be against accused Almas and Pappu @ Irfan. Nobody else has seen them assaulting the informant. The scrutiny of all these contentions was required in order to see as to whether offence under the Atrocities Act has been made out or not. In view of the decision in Prathvi Raj Chauhan Vs. Union of India and others, [MANU/SC/0157/2020 : (2020) 4 SCC 727], if prima facie case is not made out against the accused invoking the Atrocities Act, then such accused can be released on bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, as there will not be bar under Section 18 or 18-A of the Atrocities Act. We, therefore, come to conclusion at this stage on the basis of the material which is before us that no such prima facie case has been made out to attract the offence under the Atrocities Act against accused Almas and Pappu Shaikh. Their application before the learned Special Judge under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was not barred under Section 18 or 18-A of the Atrocities Act.  {Para 7}

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY (AURANGABAD BENCH)

Criminal Appeal Nos. 119 of 2023, 974 of 2022 and 946 of 2022

Decided On: 11.04.2023

Rijwan Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Citation: 2023(2) ABR (CRI) 712: AIRONLINE 2023 Bom 756. MANU/MH/1445/2023

Print Page

Bombay HC: Under which circumstances, Abuses given on telephone does not amount to offence under SC & ST Atrocities Act?

The informant, her husband and mother were sitting in the court-yard of her house. Then she says that the appellant gave a phone call on her mobile, she told that he should settle the dispute between him and his wife. But the appellant was making grievances against his wife with the informant. She had cut the phone after giving the advise. But, thereafter, according to her, the present appellant was calling her again and again and abusing. She further says that two social workers, who were with her, advised her to put the phone on speaker mode and listen as to what the appellant is saying. It is stated that the present appellant gave abuses in the name of caste to the informant. {Para 5}

14. The fact that is then ought to have been thoroughly considered by the learned Special Judge, Nandurbar was whether the appellant had knowledge about putting the mobile phone on speaker mode by the informant. Certainly when no such document is forthcoming, at this stage, at the cost of repetitions, it can be said that prima facie, the offence under the SC and ST Act is not made out.

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY (AURANGABAD BENCH)

Criminal Appeal No. 41 of 2021 and Criminal Application No. 396/2021

Decided On: 04.05.2021

Mahesh Bhikaji Badave Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Vibha Kankanwadi, J.

Citation: 2022(2) ABR(CRI)389: AIRONLINE 2021 Bom 7134, MANU/MH/1270/2021.

Print Page

Supreme Court: Under which circumstances, chamber of public servant is not public place as per SC & ST (Atrocities) Act?

Taking the allegations in the FIR at their face value, it would reveal that what is alleged is that when the complainant was in his office the Accused came there; enquired with the complainant; not being satisfied, started abusing him in the name of his caste; and insulted him. Thereafter, three colleagues of the complainant came there, pacified the Accused and took him away. {Para 13}

14. It is thus clear that even as per the FIR, the incident has taken place within the four corners of the chambers of the complainant. The other colleagues of the complainant arrived at the scene after the occurrence of the incident.

15. We are, therefore, of the considered view that since the incident has not taken place at a place which can be termed to be a place within public view, the offence would not come under the provisions of either Section 3(1)(r) or Section 3(1)(s) of the SC-ST Act.

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal Nos. 96-97 of 2025 

Decided On: 31.01.2025

Karuppudayar Vs. State Rep. by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Lalgudi Trichy and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

B.R. Gavai,  and Augustine George Masih, , JJ.

Author: B.R. Gavai, J.

Citation: 2025 INSC 132, MANU/SC/0129/2025,AIR 2025 SC 705

Print Page

Bombay HC: When incident occurred inside the house, Atrocities Act is not attracted, accused is entitled to be released on Anticipatory bail

 Taking into consideration the well settled position of law if the facts in the present case are taken into consideration, admittedly there is no reference regarding the insult or humiliation with reference to the caste the recitals of the FIR also shows that the alleged incident has taken place inside the house so it is not within the public view. Undisputedly, the statements recorded after registration of the crime shows that there is absolutely no reference as to the insult by referring the caste of the informant. The general allegations are made against the appellants and from the allegations admittedly the offence comes under the Indian Penal Code however, the recitals of the FIR are not sufficient to attract the provisions under the Act of 1989. Considering the allegations levelled against the present appellants, the bar under Section 18 or 18A is not attracted, and therefore, the appellants are entitled to be released on bail.

{Para 13}

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY (NAGPUR BENCH)

Criminal Appeal No. 784 of 2022

Decided On: 07.07.2023

Rekha and Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Urmila S. Joshi-Phalke, J.

Citation: 2023 ALLMR (CRI) 2997,MANU/MH/2598/2023.

Print Page

Supreme Court: Mandatory To Hear Informant/Victim Before Granting Bail In Rape Offences, SC/ST Act Cases

 In the instant case, it appears to be that the

concerned respondents – accused had not impleaded the

present appellant as the party – respondent in the bail

proceedings filed by them before the High Court, and the

concerned Public Prosecutor also had not informed the

appellant – victim about the said proceedings. {Para 5}

6. It is pertinent to note that as per Section 439(1A)

of Cr.P.C., the presence of the informant or any person

authorised by him or her is obligatory at the time of

hearing of the application for bail to the person under

sub-section (3) of Section 376 or Section 376AB or Section

376DA or Section 376DB of the IPC. Similarly, it is also

mandatory on the part of the Special Public Prosecutor of

the State Government to inform the victim about the court

proceedings, including bail proceedings as contemplated in

sub-section (3) of Section 15A of the Scheduled Castes and

Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

7. In the instant case, there is gross violation of the

said statutory provisions contained in Section 439(1A) of

Cr.P.C. and Section 15A(3) of the SC/ST Act, at the

instance of the respondents. The High Court also in the

impugned order has not considered the said mandatory

requirement of both the Acts and granted bail to the

concerned respondents in a very casual and cursory manner

and without assigning any cogent reasons, though the

concerned respondents are prima facie involved in a very

serious offences.

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.5385 OF 2024

(Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No.5027 of 2024)

X  Vs THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

Dated: 13TH DECEMBER, 2024.

Print Page

Bombay HC: The Magistrate and Sessions courts must apply their mind before taking cognizance of offence against an accused

 The orders are not required to be passed without application of mind and mechanically even by a Sessions Judge. Thereafter, in the present matter on 04.04.2019 there is order by learned District Judge-4/Additional Sessions Judge for issuance of process against the accused. It is to be noted that Section 14 of the Atrocities Act came to be amended with effect from 26.01.2016 and it made provision for power to take cognizance of the offence directly to the Special Court. Meaning thereby, there was no necessity of committal of the case by Judicial Magistrate First Class. In other words, the Investigating Officer was supposed to file the charge sheet directly before the Special Court established under the Atrocities Act and thereupon such Court was empowered to take cognizance directly of the offences under the Atrocities Act. Here, in this case, no such procedure has been adopted. In fact, we deprecate use of stamp for the orders of taking cognizance. Because taking of cognizance of an offence, involves the process of application of mind and it should be specifically mentioned for which offences the cognizance has been taken. There might be such circumstances that some of the offences are not made out though the Investigating Officer mentions it in charge sheet. Here, there is no such detailed order, but we take that the cognizance has been taken in respect of offence under Section 295-A, 153-A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(v) of the Atrocities Act. Learned District Judge-4 (it ought to have been ‘Special Judge, under the S.C. & S.T. Act’) had not even considered the point of sanction under Section 196 of the Code of Criminal Procedure at the time of taking cognizance. 

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

901 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2375 OF 2019

Dnyaneshwar Rohidas Wakale, Vs   The State of Maharashtra

CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI &

S.G. CHAPALGAONKAR, JJ.

DATE : 19th SEPTEMBER, 2024

Citation: 2024:BHC-AUG:22690-DB

ORDER : (PER : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.).

Read full Judgment here: Click here.

Print Page

Bombay HC: The Magistrate and Sessions court must see before issuing process against accused whether investigating officer has obtained sanction as per S. 195, 196, 197, 198 of CRPC if it is required

 We are disturbed to note that Judges from the District Judiciary are not paying attention to the requirements under Sections 195, 196, 197, 198 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The embargo created under these provisions should be considered by them before taking cognizance. In succession in recent times we are coming across such orders which have been passed without considering these provisions under the Code of Criminal Procedure. If these basic provisions are not adhered to, then it is prejudicial to the accused persons as they would be unnecessarily asked to face the trial when there was defect or illegality in passing of the order of taking cognizance of the offence itself. Therefore, we want to put the Judges of the

District Judiciary on guard and direct them that they should consider these provisions whenever they are necessary and pass detailed orders in respect of the same. {Para 11}

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

901 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2375 OF 2019

Dnyaneshwar Rohidas Wakale, Vs   The State of Maharashtra

CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI &

S.G. CHAPALGAONKAR, JJ.

DATE : 19th SEPTEMBER, 2024

Citation: 2024:BHC-AUG:22690-DB

ORDER : (PER : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.).

Read full Judgment here: Click here.

Print Page

Bombay High court directs that special courts must mention their exact designation while passing orders under The Special Acts

Time and again, this Court is bringing it to the notice of Judges in the District Judiciary that they should write proper designation wherever it is involved. It reminds them as to under which provisions of law and Act they are exercising their powers. ‘District Judge’ is always referred for matters of Civil side and for matter of Criminal side it is ‘Sessions Judge’ or ‘Additional Sessions Judge’ and in case of special enactments, it would be either ‘Special Judge’ or designated Court under the relevant Act.

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

901 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2375 OF 2019

Dnyaneshwar Rohidas Wakale, Vs   The State of Maharashtra

CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI &

S.G. CHAPALGAONKAR, JJ.

DATE : 19th SEPTEMBER, 2024

Citation: 2024:BHC-AUG:22690-DB

ORDER : (PER : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.)

Print Page

Important Supreme court & Bombay HC Judgments on SC & ST (Atrocities Act)

 1) Supreme Court: Cognizance of offence Against Public Servant under S 4 of SC & ST (Atrocities Act) For Offence Of Neglect Of Duty Cannot Be Taken Without Administrative Enquiry Report

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal No. 349 of 2021

Decided On: 17.05.2024

The State of GNCT of Delhi and Ors. Vs. Praveen Kumar*

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

M.M. Sundresh and S.V. Bhatti, JJ.

Author: S.V. Bhatti, J.

Citation:  MANU/SC/0469/2024.

https://www.lawweb.in/2024/06/supreme-court-cognizance-of-offence.html

2) Bombay HC guidelines regarding video recording of all proceeding under SC & ST (Atrocities Act) including bail application

Print Page

Supreme Court: Cognizance of offence Against Public Servant under S 4 of SC & ST (Atrocities Act) For Offence Of Neglect Of Duty Cannot Be Taken Without Administrative Enquiry Report

 The argument of the learned Counsel for the complainant is that the word "charges" occurring in proviso to Section 4(2) of the SC/ST Act is to be interpreted that the enquiry report is to be sought before framing of charges and not before the registration of the FIR.

{Para 49}

50. To my mind, the said argument is bereft of merit as the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Charansingh (supra) and as per the proviso noted above, the enquiry report is to be sought before the criminal proceedings are initiated and not before the framing of charges.

14.4. The absence of recommendation would bar taking cognizance by the Court. In a given case, if a complaint without recommendation is filed before the Magistrate, the Magistrate before proceeding further to keep his decision conforming to Section 4(2) read with the proviso, calls for a report/recommendation from the Department against the named public servant. The Special Court or the Exclusive Special Court based on an administrative enquiry report can take cognizance of the alleged offence and thereon direct penal proceedings. By keeping in perspective, the language/scheme of Section 4, and on the literal interpretation of Sub-sections (1), (2) and (3) of Section 4, it would be legally permissible that the jurisdiction for infraction of Sub-section (2) of Section 4 is attracted only on the recommendation of the administrative enquiry and then, the cognizance Under Sub-section (3) of Section 4 is ordered.

15. By adhering to the above procedure, we hold that the Magistrate would have the accusation of a party and view of the Department while deciding to take cognizance of the offence or not. At the cost of repetition stated that, the purpose of an administrative enquiry is to find out the conduct of a public servant against whom allegations of failure of duty or function are made and the omission or commission is bonafide or willful.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal No. 349 of 2021

Decided On: 17.05.2024

The State of GNCT of Delhi and Ors. Vs. Praveen Kumar*

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

M.M. Sundresh and S.V. Bhatti, JJ.

Author: S.V. Bhatti, J.

Citation:  MANU/SC/0469/2024.

Print Page

Bombay HC guidelines regarding video recording of all proceeding under SC & ST (Atrocities Act) including bail application

 In view of this discussion, the questions referred to us are answered as follows :

(1) The 'proceedings' under Section 15-A(10) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 would cover all proceedings including a 'judicial proceeding' as contemplated under section 2(i) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

(2) It would be necessary to video record any proceeding relating to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 even though the proceedings are held in open court.

The objective to be achieved is effective implementation of the Amended Chapter IV-A of the Atrocities Act, which is meant to protect the rights of victims and witnesses.

(3) Hearing of a bail application under section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 is a 'judicial proceeding' as contemplated under section 15-A of the Atrocities Act.

(4) Section 15-A (10) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 can be implemented in the absence of rules framed under the Act or formulation of a scheme for implementation. {Para 34}

35. Having answered the reference thus, the question would arise regarding the fate of the matters which are already decided wherein the proceedings were not video recorded. We are holding in this judgment that Section 15-A(10) of the Atrocities Act is mandatory. This judgment answering the reference will not affect the past proceedings which are not recorded. Effect of this judgment would be prospective.

36. It is also to be kept in mind that as of today all the Courts are not equipped with the facility of video recording. As mentioned earlier, as per Section 21 of the Atrocities Act it is the duty of the State Government to provide these facilities. Therefore, we direct the State Government to provide the facility of video recording in all the Courts in the State of Maharashtra wherever the proceedings under the Atrocities Act are to be taken up. This shall be done at the earliest. However, till the time such facilities are provided, the Courts where the facilities are not provided, may proceed without video recording the proceedings especially when the personal liberty of an accused is at stake.

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY

Criminal Appeal No. 911 of 2019

Decided On: 13.03.2024

Hema Suresh Ahuja and Ors. Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

D.K. Upadhyaya, C.J. and Sarang V. Kotwal, J.

Author: Sarang V. Kotwal, J.

Citation:  MANU/MH/1654/2024.

Print Page

Important Supreme Court and Bombay HC Judgments on bail(Part 2)

1)  Supreme court: No automatic arrest in offence U/S 498A of IPC

Arnesh Kumar vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 2 July, 2014

https://www.lawweb.in/2014/07/guidelines-of-supreme-court-to-police.html

2) Supreme Court Guidelines for releasing accused or convict on bail- Satender Kumar Antil Vs.CBI

b) The investigating agencies and their officers are duty-bound to comply with the mandate of Section 41 and 41A of the Code and the directions issued by this Court in Arnesh Kumar (supra). Any dereliction on their part has to be brought to the notice of the higher authorities by the court followed by appropriate action.

c) The courts will have to satisfy themselves on the compliance of Section 41 and 41A of the Code. Any non-compliance would entitle the Accused for grant of bail.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Miscellaneous Application No. 1849 of 2021 in Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 

 Satender Kumar Antil  Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Sanjay Kishan Kaul and M.M. Sundresh, JJ.

Author: M.M. Sundresh, J.

Decided On: 11.07.2022.

https://www.lawweb.in/2022/08/whether-accused-is-entitled-to-bail-if.html

Print Page

Bombay high court judgment on grant of Anticipatory bail to accused in offence under SC & ST(Atrocities Act)

 Concerning the applicability of provisions of Section 438 of Cr.P.C., it shall not apply to the cases under the Act of 1989. However, if the complaint does not make out a prima facie case for applicability of the provisions of the Act, 1989, the bar created by 18 and 18-A(i) shall not apply. This aspect has been clarified while deciding review petitions.

27. In the case of Swaran Singh and Others V/s. State of

Maharashtra and Others, 2008 SCC 435. It was observed that the

abuses on the caste should be uttered in the presence of independent

witnesses. The independent person may not be those persons who

are relatives or friends of complainant.

29. In the light of observation made hereinabove, we are of

considered opinion that, the bar under Section 18 of the Atrocities

Act cannot be invoked against Appellants in the present case for

depriving them the pre-arrest bail.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1258 OF 2022

Jagdish Sajjankumar Banka, Vs  The State of Maharashtra,

CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND

PRAKASH D. NAIK, JJ.

PRONOUNCED ON : 10th MARCH, 2023.

JUDGMENT – (PER : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)

Citation: 2023(2) ABR (CRI) 301: AIRONLINE 2023 Bom 374

Print Page

Bombay HC: Person belonging to Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes are entitled to protection in any other part of country, where offence is committed even if he is not recognized in that part

 The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 is a social reformatory legislation enacted for the purpose of combating special category of crimes and, hence, it requires an interpretation, which would attain the purpose and not defeat it. The reliance placed upon the two Constitution Bench judgments, identifying the 'Scheduled Castes' and 'Scheduled Tribes' and the act of atrocities, by referring to the principle propounded in those judgments is completely misplaced as the geographical limitation under Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution, which is conveyed by use of the words "in relation to that State" or "Union territory" are confined for conferring the benefits/privileges like reservation, employment or education and in no case, it shall be applied mutatis mutandis, when it comes to commission of atrocities upon the persons belonging to the said class for the simple reason that conferring privileges is an affirmative action intended for upliftment of these classes, but for protecting their very existence and identity, the bar of territorial arena cannot be applied.

By restricting the identity of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe only in relation to the State of his origin, would even defeat their fundamental right under Article 19 (1)(d) and (e) of the Constitution, as it would indirectly require them to be bound to their State of origin, with no chance of taking steps to progress themselves by stepping outside. This definitely would cause more harm to the identified class than advancing them to compete with members of the higher class and assisting them in achieving equality, as enshrined in the Constitution.Hence, we negate the submissions advanced by Dr. Chandrachud on Issue A. {Para 71}

73. In the wake of the aforesaid discussion, we answer the reference, as under :-

-: ISSUE A :-

The scope of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes ( Prevention of Atrocities Act), 1989 cannot be restricted to a person belonging to a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe to the State or Union Territory in which he is declared as Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe only, but he is also entitled to the protection under the Act, in any other part of the country, where the offence is committed, though he is not recognized as Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe in that part.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY

Criminal Appeal Nos. 949 of 2022, 

Decided On: 01.09.2023

Sanjay Krushna Katkar Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bench: R.P. Mohite-Dere, Bharati Dangre, N. J. Jamadar

Author: Bharati H. Dangre, J.

Citation: AIR2023Bom317,MANU/MH/3482/2023.

Print Page

Whether accused should claim bail under POCSO Act or The SC & ST Atrocities Act if there is only passing allegations under POCSO Act in police papers?

 In the case at hand, the allegations against the applicant quathe children are that in the procession there were girls as well andthe applicant had video-graphed the dance of ladies and girls with a malicious intent. Rest of the allegations predominantly pertain to acts and conduct which fall within the mischief of the provisions contained in SC and ST Act, 1989 including the alleged outraging of the modesty of a member of Schedule Caste and hurling of abuses with reference to the caste in public view. {Para 6}

7. Apart from a passing reference that there were girls in the procession and they were also video-graphed, there is no other allegation which would prima facie fall within the dragnet of section 12 of the Act, 2012.

8. In the circumstances, it would be appropriate that the applicant prefers an appeal as envisaged by section 14A(4) of  the SC and ST Act, 1989.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2589 OF 2023

Dinanath Manik Katkar Vs The State of Maharashtra and Another 

CORAM : N. J. JAMADAR, J.

DATE : SEPTEMBER 13, 2023

Print Page

Whether the court must issue notice to Victim even if accused has not made out ground for releasing him on bail in SC & ST Atrocities Act?

 At the cost of repetition, we say that the present order

does not speak that the notice was issued to the informant and

he was heard in view of the right that has been given under

Section 15A (1) and (3) of the Atrocities Act. It cannot be said

that as case is not made out for releasing an accused involving

in the offence under the Atrocities Act; it is not necessary to

issue notice to the informant. It is the first step that is required

to be taken after the presentation of the application for bail.

When right has been given to the informant or the victim, then

notice should be issued and he or she should be heard and then

only either order can be passed, allowing or rejecting the

application. {Para 9}

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.513 OF 2023

Kishor Shivdas Shinde Vs The State of Maharashtra,

CORAM: SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI AND

ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, JJ.

DATE : 21st JULY, 2023

JUDGMENT [PER SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.] :

Print Page

Whether Bail Order Passed in an offence under SC & ST Atrocities Act Without Notice To Victim A Nullity, Liable To Be Recalled?

 It is to be noted that in this regard that, as per Section

15A(3) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes

(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, a victim or his dependent

shall have the right to reasonable, accurate and timely notice of

any court proceedings including any bail proceedings and the

said Public Prosecutor or the State Government shall inform the

victim about the proceedings under the Act. In this case, as one

of the offences were under the provisions of the Schedules

Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989,

a notice was mandatory as contemplated under the above

provision. Therefore, issuance of an order without complying with such statutory mandate makes the order nullity. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Punjab v. Davinder Pal Singh Bhullar [2011 (14) SCC 770], it was observed as follows:

“If a judgment has been pronounced without

jurisdiction or in violation of principles of natural justice

or where the order has been pronounced without giving

an opportunity of being heard to a party affected by it or

where an order was obtained by abuse of the process of

Court which would really amount to its being without

jurisdiction, inherent powers can be exercised to recall

such order for the reason that in such an eventuality the

order becomes a nullity and the provisions of Section

362 Cr.P.C. would not operate. In such eventuality, the

judgment is manifestly contrary to the audi alteram

partem rule of natural justice. The power of recall is

different from the power of altering/reviewing the

judgment. However, the party seeking recall/alteration

has to establish that it was not at fault..............” {Para 6}

7. After referring to the observations made by the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said decision, this Court in

Pushpangathan's case as well as Babu @ Achayan's case held

that, when the order passed by this Court in a criminal proceeding was without jurisdiction and without notice to the affected parties and thereby in violation of the principles of natural justice, the same can be recalled. In this case, despite the fact that there was a mandate as contemplated under Section 15A(3) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, the order is seen passed without giving a proper notice to the victim. Therefore, it is an order issued not only in violation of the statutory provisions and also in violation of principles of natural justice. This Court passed the order without taking note of the fact that, no such notice was served upon the  affected parties. In such circumstances, I am of the view that, the order passed by this Court is liable to be recalled in the light of the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Davinder Pal Singh Bhullar's case cited supra.

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

CRL.M.APPL.NO.4/2022 IN BAIL APPL. NO. 330 OF 2022

BABU T., S/O CHACKO THOMAS, Vs  BYJU SEBASTIAN

PRESENT

 MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.

Monday, the 23rd day of January 2023 

Print Page

Whether an offence Under SC & ST Atrocities Act is made out if abuses are given on Telephone?

 Further, she states that when her husband had given a phone call to landlord Mr. Murlidhar Tantak to apprise him of the behaviour of the tenant, at that time, he had abused as well as in between it is stated that the appellants had also abused. Meaning thereby, those abuses were given on phone. Abuses when given on phone cannot be said to be within the public view or at a public place so as to attract the ingredients of offence punishable under Section 3(1)(r) or 3(1)(s) of the Atrocities Act.

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY (AURANGABAD BENCH)

Criminal Appeal No. 858 of 2022

Yogesh Laxman Pandav and Ors. Vs.  The State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Vibha Kankanwadi and Abhay S. Waghwase, JJ.

Author: Vibha Kankanwadi, J.

Decided On: 05.01.2023.

MANU/MH/0129/2023,2023 Lawweb (Bom HC ) 6.

Print Page

What are Powers and Duties of Special Judge under SC& ST Act 1989?

Important provisions providing Powers and duties of Special Judge under SC& ST Act 1989 are as follows:

 S.14. Special Court and Exclusive Special Court.—(1) For the purpose of providing for speedy trial, the State Government shall, with the concurrence of the Chief Justice of the High Court, by notification in the Official Gazette, establish an Exclusive Special Court for one or more Districts:

Provided that in Districts where less number of cases under this Act is recorded, the State Government shall, with the concurrence of the Chief Justice of the High Court, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify for such Districts, the Court of Session to be a Special Court to try the offences under this Act:

Provided further that the Courts so established or specified shall have power to directly take cognizance of offences under this Act. In every trial in the Special Court or the Exclusive Special Court, the proceedings shall be continued from day-to-day until all the witnesses in attendance have been examined, unless the Special Court or the Exclusive Special Court finds the adjournment of the same beyond the following day to be necessary for reasons to be recorded in writing:

Provided that when the trial relates to an offence under this Act, the trial shall, as far as possible, be completed within a period of two months from the date of filing of the charge sheet.]

{Subs. by Act 1 of 2016, S. 8 (w.e.f. 26-1-2016).}

Print Page