Victim's status solely can't be ground for prosecution under SC/ST Act: SC

The bench said that such acts cannot be allowed to be perpetuated and need to be stopped at the very outset so that there is no miscarriage of justice.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday said that merely because the complainant belonged to the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes categories, it cannot be the sole ground for prosecution under the stringent SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. It emphasised, the offences alleged must have been committed solely on the basis of the victim’s caste status.

A bench of Chief Justice of India B R Gavai and Justics Augustine George Masih dismissed an appeal filed by Konde Nageshwar Rao against the 2014 judgment of the High Court of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, quashing the criminal proceedings initiated against two persons under the special law.

Relying upon previous judgment in Masumsha Hasanasha Musalman Vs State of Maharashtra (2000), the bench pointed out it has been said the misuse of the statute to settle personal scores or to harass individuals cannot be permitted if it is apparent.

Also referring to Ravinder Singh Vs Sukhbir Singh and Others (2013), the bench underscored, it has been said, the court should in such a situation be not hesitant to step in and stop the said misuse.

"Prosecution needs to be quashed at an early stage to prevent undue harassment of the accused where there is clear legal infirmity in the prosecution case, such as the allegations, even if taken at their face value, do not disclose an offence or the entire case is a bad faith exercise weaponized to settle personal scores, rather than seeking justice,'' the court said.

This court in Dr Subhash Kashinath Mahajan Vs State of Maharashtra and another (2018) also observed that there has been an alarming increase in false complaints under the SC/ST Act, particularly against public servants and judicial officers with an oblique motive to settle personal scores or to harass individuals.

Such acts cannot be allowed to be perpetuated and need to be stopped at the very outset so that there is no miscarriage of justice, the bench pointed out.

In the present case, upholding the High Court's order, the bench said, since the very intent was absent, the offences for which the prosecution has been launched were not made out.

The appellant claimed he was wrongly prosecuted by the accused respondents for he earlier lodged a complaint related to allotment of land. The court, however, found his prosecution was launched in a case related to a group clash where both the parties belonged to the SC/ST communities and it was not based on caste-related malice.

"Since it was admittedly a intra-caste dispute, involvement of the appellant because of him being a Scheduled Caste in the criminal case does not arise, what to say of mala fide," Justice Masih wrote in the 13-page judgment for the bench.