The Allahabad High Court ordered that proceedings under the SC/ST Act can be quashed using Section 482 of the CrPC if they involve an abuse of the legal process. The court emphasized that such powers should be exercised cautiously. This decision highlights the balance between safeguarding rights and preventing misuse of legal provisions. It reinforces the judiciary’s role in upholding fairness and justice.
The Allahabad High Court stated that proceedings under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 can be quashed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) if there is an abuse of the legal process.
The court reviewing an application challenging a single-bench order that deemed an application for quashing an entire Sessions Trial, which included offences under the SC/ST Act, as not maintainable due to Section 14-A of the Act.
The division bench, comprising Justice Siddhartha Varma and Justice Vinod Diwakar, noted,
“Whether an application involving the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court is to be entertained or not is a question to be considered and answered on a case-by-case basis, depending on the specific facts and circumstances. No general proposition or rigid formula can be established. The guiding principle is whether the continuation of proceedings would constitute an abuse of the court’s process or if the High Court’s intervention is necessary to secure the ends of justice.”
The applicant represented by Advocate Jayant Kumar, while the respondent represented by the Government Advocate. In a related case, another single-bench had ruled that even if a statutory appeal under Section 14-A of the SC/ST Act is available, an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. could still be considered, referencing Supreme Court judgments in Ramawatar and B. Venkateswaran & Ors. v. P. Bakthavatchalam (AIR 2023 SC 262).
Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act) deals with the Power of the State Government to Appoint Special Courts. It empowers the state government to establish special courts for the purpose of trying cases related to the atrocities committed against the Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs).
Counsel for the applicant pointed out that the Ghulam Rasool Khan judgment, issued on July 28, 2022, did not take into account several key Supreme Court rulings, including Hitesh Verma (September 5, 2020), Ram Gopal (September 21, 2021), and Ramawatar (October 25, 2021). He emphasized that B. Venkateswaran established that complaints regarding offences under Section 3(i)(v) and (v)(a) of the SC/ST Act can be quashed by the High Court’s inherent powers.
He also cited the Supreme Court’s decision in Gulam Mustafa v. State of Karnataka (AIR 2023 SC (Criminal) 966), asserting that if a miscarriage of justice occurs due to the filing of a case under the SC/ST Act, the High Court may quash the FIR, charge sheet, and order of cognizance using its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. or the Constitution.
The court acknowledged the crucial question at hand: whether an application to quash the entire proceedings under the SC/ST Act, without challenging any interlocutory order like the summoning order, could be barred by the precedent set in Ghulam Rasool Khan.
The bench clarified the “distinction between a proceeding being not maintainable”and not liable to be entertained.”
The former indicates that proceedings cannot proceed at all, while the latter implies that although an application may be valid, it may not be entertained based on the specific circumstances of the case.
The court concluded that this distinction, while subtle, is essential and must be consistently recognized.