SC/ST Act: not every insult amounts to atrocity, High Court rules; law not applicable to administrative disputes
Kolkata (The Uttam Hindu): The Calcutta High Court has delivered an important ruling on the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The court clarified that every instance of insult against a member of a Scheduled Caste does not automatically qualify as an “atrocity” under Section 3(1)(r) of the Act. It held that unless the insult or threat is made publicly, interpersonal differences, administrative disputes, or alleged workplace humiliation cannot be treated as offences under the SC/ST Act.
Case related to Sanskrit College
According to a report by Live Law, the case pertains to Sanskrit College and University. The petitioner is the Head of Department (HOD) at the university and holds BA, MA, and PhD degrees in Sanskrit. The complainant, an Assistant Professor from the same department, belongs to a Scheduled Caste community.
The Assistant Professor accused the HOD of harbouring jealousy and harassing him. He alleged that he was excluded from departmental decisions, his classes were stopped, he was kept away from examination duties, and he was insulted during an online meeting. The complainant claimed these actions were taken because of his caste identity, causing him mental distress.
Court says administrative dispute, not a criminal offence
The matter was heard by Justice Chaitali Chatterjee Das. After examining the allegations, the court ruled that even if all the claims made by the complainant were accepted as true, they did not meet the essential ingredients of an offence under the 1989 SC/ST Act. The court observed that the allegations primarily related to internal administrative and professional grievances within the department, which cannot be classified as caste-based atrocities.
No evidence of public humiliation found
Following the investigation, police had filed a charge sheet under Section 3(1)(r) of the SC/ST Act, after which the HOD approached the High Court. Upon examining the case diary, the court noted that none of the alleged incidents involved caste-based abuse or humiliation in “public view,” which is a mandatory requirement to establish the offence under this provision.
The court also pointed out that there was no specific assertion that the petitioner intentionally insulted or intimidated the complainant on the basis of caste. As a result, the High Court concluded that the case did not attract the provisions of the SC/ST Act.