Political & Economic Notes :
Onslaught on the Rights of Dalit and Other Oppressed People
The March 20 th , 2018 Judgment of the Supreme Court Bench of Justice A . K . Goel and U . U . Lalit in a case under the SCs and STs ( Prevention of Atrocities ) Act , 1989 , is a serious onslaught on the decades ’ long struggle of Dalit and other oppressed people for the legal protections from the crimes and atrocities that are being perpetrated against them for generations .
Directing the Govt . to amend the sec . 18 of the Act , the judgment had set some directives , guidelines and made some observations . They include :
1 . A public servant can be arrested under the Act only with the written permission of their appointing authority . In the case of private employees , the Deputy Superintendent of Police should conduct a preliminary inquiry before the FIR is registered to check whether the case will fall within the parameters of the Atrocities Act or if it is frivolous or motivated .
2 . The 1989 Act penalises the casteist insults and even denies anticipatory bail to the suspected offenders . The Law is therefore used to rob a person of his personal liberty merely on the unilateral word of the complainant . ..... The anticipatory bail should be allowed if the accused is able to prima facie prove that the complaint against him is malafide .
Any deviation from the court directions would automatically lead to the contempt of Supreme Court .
3 . Past three decades have seen complainants – who belonged to the marginalised sections of the society – use the SCs / STs ( POA ) Act , 1989 to exact “ vengeance ” and satisfy the vested interests .
4 . Instead of blurring caste lines , the Act had been misused to
May - 2018 file false complaints to promote caste hatred . The current working of Atrocities Act may even “ perpetuate ” casteism if it is not brought in line and court needs to intervene to check “ the false implication of innocent citizens on caste lines ”
5 . Innocent citizens are termed accused , .... The legislature never intended to use the Atrocities Act as an instrument to blackmail or wreck personal vengeance .
6 . The Act cannot be converted into a charter for exploitation or oppression by any unscrupulous person or by the police for extraneous reasons against other citizens , irrespective of caste or religion , is against the guarantee of the Constitution . This Court must enforce such a guarantee . Law should not result in caste hatred .
The Court said that a Public servant finds it difficult to give adverse remarks against employees for fear that they may be charged under the Act .
These directives or guidelines or observations are a clear indictment of the Act ; the way it is enforced and the way the victims of atrocities and crimes are using or misusing the Act . The comments or observations of the court are totally in a bad taste . They sound like the utterances of a politician who is under a strong influence of ideas that go against the very theme and spirit of the Act . The judges here did not confine themselves to examine the specific point of the complaint and give their verdict , but elevated themselves to the position of policy makers and had revealed their reactionary bent of mind .
The statement of Objects and Reasons of the 1989 Act noted that the vested interests try to terrorise Dalits whenever they assert their rights . The Act had excluded the right of anticipatory bail to the accused keeping in view the special nature of crimes Dalits encounter in their life . The Supreme Court simply ignored the realities of society as well as the experiences of people when it directed the amendment of Sec . 18 of the Act to allow the anticipatory bail to the accused under the Act .
The Court directive that no action can be taken against a public servant under the Act without a written permission from the appointing authority and a private citizen accused of similar crimes can be arrested only after an enquiry by the Deputy Superintendent of Police defeat the very purpose of the Act . It is difficult to believe that the judges are unaware of the fact that in a caste – ridden Indian Society it is too difficult for a poor labourer , attender , clerk , employee from a Dalit or S . T community to complain and get permission from the higher authorities to file a case and pursue it . Similarly , in a country where the repressive machinery is in direct collusion with the exploiting classes and bureaucracy and involved in committing or shielding the crimes and atrocities against the Dalits and STs , it will not be difficult to understand the fate of a complaint if it has to pass through the police scrutiny .
Various laws enacted in India claiming to protect the rights and lives of Dalits and other oppressed people had come after going through prolonged sufferings and as a product of struggles by the people . The Untouchability ( Offences ) Act came in 1955 . It was renamed as Protection of Civil Rights Act in 1976 . But , after a lapse of 13 years , the rulers had come with the admission that
15