On Tuesday(9th April), The Rajasthan High Court issued an interim order to prevent coercive action against a judicial officer accused of instructing a rape survivor to undress in court. The court emphasized the importance of press freedom while warning against sensationalizing the case. The case is scheduled for further proceedings on May 27. The accused officer’s actions are being contested by the Rajasthan Judicial Services Officers Association.
In Hindaun, Rajasthan, an 18-year-old Dalit gang rape survivor accuses a magistrate of forcing her to undress under the guise of examining her injuries. The incident sparked widespread outrage, leading to an FIR against the magistrate under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The Rajasthan High Court has ordered an investigation. Women’s groups and human rights organizations have expressed grave concern over the incident, prompting a thorough examination by authorities.
On 13th March, The Jharkhand High Court grants protective order to AajTak’s Sudhir Chaudhary, following SC/ST Act complaint. Similar to Supreme Court’s ruling, no coercive actions against him. Allegations stem from comments on tribal community after former Chief Minister’s detention. Supreme Court’s notice to state police prevents coercive steps. High Court aligns stance after apex court’s decree. Jharkhand High Court defers examination of annulment pleas until Supreme Court’s deliberations. Chaudhary’s legal representatives focus on complainants’ allegations only.
The Bombay High Court has ruled that in accordance with Section 15A (10) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, all proceedings must be recorded on video. The Bombay High Court on Monday has mandated that all proceedings under this act must be video recorded. This decision, as per Section 15A […]
The Delhi High Court has established a crucial precedent concerning bail applications under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. This landmark decision, delivered by Justice Navin Chawla, underscores the indispensable requirement of hearing the victim or complainant before granting bail to the accused in cases filed under the SC/ST Act. […]
The bench of the Supreme Court, including Justice BR Gavai, Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra, and Justice Sandeep Mehta, emphasized the importance of deliberate intent as per Section 3(1)(xi) of the SC/ST Act. The justices noted that an act of outraging modesty qualifies under this section only if it is executed with a clear intention targeting […]
In a landmark ruling, the Allahabad High Court has made a significant observation regarding the applicability of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act) in instances of caste-based verbal abuse occurring within private premises. The judgment, delivered by Justice Suneet Kumar, provides a nuanced interpretation of the Act’s scope, […]
In a pivotal judgment, the Kerala High Court has made a significant decision regarding the suspension of sentences in the infamous Madhu lynching case. Madhu, a mentally challenged tribal youth, was brutally beaten to death in Palakkad’s Attapady in February 2018, after being accused of stealing rice from a grocery shop. Also read- Kerala High […]
The Allahabad High Court has set aside a cognizance order implicating an individual under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, emphasizing that mere victimhood of a member of the SC/ST community does not automatically implicate the accused under the Act. Justice Sadhna Rani (Thakur) clarified that for the 1989 Act to apply, there must be […]
