Merely Naming A Caste Without Intent To Insult, Not An Offence Under SC/ST Act: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court on Saturday (28 January), observed that merely taking the name of a person’s caste could not be considered an offence under the Scheduled Castes and the Schedules Tribes (SC/ST) Act, 1989, unless it is done with an intention to insult that person.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna partly allowed the petition filed by V Shailesh Kumar and quashed the charges levelled against him under Section 3(1)(r) and (s) of the Act, while sustaining and permitting the continuation of proceedings for other charges of assault and criminal intimidation.

“The soul of the provision is intention. The insult should be intentional and the intimidation should be with intent to humiliate a member of the Scheduled caste or Scheduled Tribe,” the judge said in his order.

The petition was filed by one Shailesh Kumar challenging a case filed against him under the SC/ST Act. The petitioner’s counsel claimed that there was no hurling of abuses, as is alleged, and that mere hurling of abuses without any intention to insult or make casteist remarks would not become an offence under the Act.

The bench also noted that in the initial complaint soon after the incident, there was no complaint made that the petitioner had hurled abuses taking the name of the caste of the son, of the complainant.

The ruling is significant in view of the recent increase in false cases under the SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act, with several courts, including the Kerala and Punjab and Haryana High Courts, observing the same.

The law has come under the scanner due to its stringent provisions, including offences under the Act being cognizable and non-bailable offences.

In 2018, the Supreme Court issued safeguards to prevent misuse of the Act, along with introducing anticipatory bail and making a preliminary probe by the police before arrest mandatory.

The centre has since made amendments in the law to overcome the top court’s order diluting the provisions of the arrest. This law was not stayed by the apex court.