Must Establish ‘Intent to Humiliate’ in Cases Under SC/ST Act, Says Allahabad High Court

The “intent to humiliate the victim” based on their SC/ST identity must be established in order to prosecute an accused under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, the Allahabad High Court ruled on Wednesday. Justice Sadhna Rani said that mere affiliation with SC/ST community is insufficient unless there is evidence of the intention to humiliate based on caste.

With these observations, the court set aside a cognizance order passed by the Special Judge SC/ST Act, Ghaziabad, in a case involving charges under sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., and Section 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act.

One Seema Bharadwaj had filed an appeal before the High Court against the entire proceedings and summoning order passed by the special judge in the case against her. The initial allegations against her involved hurling caste-based abuses at a domestic worker at her mother’s residence, allegedly to force the employee’s resignation and facilitate the takeover of her mother’s property.

Subsequently, a coordinated assault on the domestic worker was orchestrated, allegedly under the accused’s direction. Following the assault, the victim filed an FIR, detailing an encounter with 5-6 unidentified individuals. She alleged that they hurled caste-based abuses at her and threatened her, coercing her to refrain from working at the residence of Bharadwaj’s mother.

When she resisted in withdrawing a previous case against the accused, the assailants, allegedly acting on the accused’s instructions, threatened her life. The victim was then allegedly subjected to a violent assault involving knives and batons.

Opposing the proceedings against her by the special court, the accused argued that even as per the FIR, she was not present at the spot of the incident, therefore, she could not be chargesheeted under the above-mentioned sections. Moreover, she alleged that the allegations against her were orchestrated by her brother.

The high court, considering the facts, agreed with the contention raised on behalf of the accused that since she was absent during the incident, cognizance could not be taken against her for the offences alleged.

The court referred to a 2020 Supreme Court ruling in Hitesh Verma v The State of Uttarakhand and Another, emphasizing that SC/ST Act offences require the establishment of intent to humiliate based on caste.

Moreover, while analysing the FIR, the court concluded that the motive behind the incident was not caste-related, but was to prevent the victim from working in the house of the accused’s mother.

Therefore, while criticising the trial court’s lack of judicial scrutiny, the high court opined that cognisance under the mentioned sections against the accused was not justified. Consequently, it set aside the cognisance order and directed the trial court to re-evaluate the matter after going through the above discussion within two months.