Bombay High Court: Protection Under SC/ST Act Extends Beyond State Boundaries
The Bombay High Court, in a landmark judgment, has clarified that the protection accorded to members of Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST) under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, is not confined to the states where they are officially recognized. The court emphasized that individuals are entitled to protection under the Act anywhere in India, irrespective of whether they are recognized as SC or ST in that particular region.
A full bench comprising Justices Revati Mohite Dere, Bharati Dangre, and NJ Jamadar delivered the judgment, stating,
“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.”
The court’s decision came in response to two primary questions: whether the Act’s protection applies to individuals outside their state of origin and the appropriate bench composition for hearing appeals under the Act.
Advocate Abhinav Chandrachud, representing some appellants, contended that the Act’s provisions wouldn’t apply if the victim had migrated from their original state to another. However, Maharashtra Advocate General Birendra Saraf argued that caste identity persists, regardless of migration, and thus, the Act’s protections should apply universally.
Rejecting Chandrachud’s argument, the bench observed,
“A person has no choice. It is not possible for the person to get rid of the baggage of his or her caste though he or she may come out of the occupational grouping or from the social status of that particular caste and become socially and economically forward surpassing his peers in the caste.”
The court further highlighted that caste barriers persist, even through marriage or conversion. It stated,
“Neither by marriage, nor by conversion, can a person free himself of the caste barriers. And his sufferings cannot be said to have been wiped out by marrying a person from a forward caste. The label attached to a person born into a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe may continue, notwithstanding his personal upliftment, his social upliftment by his own good deeds.”
Emphasizing the Act’s intent, the court noted that it aims to protect the human dignity of SC and ST members and should not be narrowly interpreted. The bench also pointed out the historical context, highlighting the age-old caste system in India and the practice of “untouchability,” which led to the marginalization and mistreatment of lower-caste individuals.
The court concluded by stating that the Act was designed to prevent and deter crimes against specific groups, not to grant special privileges but to shield them from derogatory actions and mistreatment due to their historical, social, and economic circumstances.
The judgment, spanning 778 pages, serves as a significant step towards ensuring justice and protection for SC and ST communities across the nation.
