Blog Image

Attenuation of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Is it going against Human Rights?

Attenuation of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, -Is it going against Human Rights?
-Tejaswini Ramakrishna, KLE Society\'s Law College, Bengaluru

Scholars believe that people on the bottom rung of Indian society have been rendered invisible in Indian Sociology due to the cognitive blackout perpetuated by the upper class and caste. As part of its overall goal of achieving an egalitarian society, India has legislated numerous welfare-centric laws that are continuously scrutinized and scrutinized. Scheduled Tribes/Scheduled Castes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 was enacted to prevent atrocities against the deprived communities and to dictate more severe sanctions than those found in the Indian Penal Code and other state laws. 

Although implementation procedures were flawed, the Act did provide a sense of reliability to the SCs and STs.  Recent Supreme Court orders have sought to introduce procedural safeguards to curb misuse of this Act. Dalits, however, believe the Supreme Court has weakened this landmark legislation by inducing uncertainty. As a result of this state of ultimate precocity, human liberation and inherent human rights have been challenged. Now, the question is, does the Act need to be improvised? Or perhaps anti-caste legislation in India should be considered?

DALITS AND THE CONSTITUTION :-
 
Historically, the transition from casting disabilities to atrocities occurred during the 3rd and 4th centuries A.D., when the Varna system faced a crisis of deviations from the agreed social norms and positive measures were needed to regulate caste discipline and boundaries. \'The Conscience of the Constitution, which is part III & IV of the Constitution, states explicitly what India is: a sovereign, socialist, secular, democratic, and republican state. 
Among other things, the core purpose of the constitution is to realize human rights in articles 14, 38, and 39, as well as time to time amendments to these provisions, which show the state\'s commitment to advance economic order and social justice. Additionally, various laws are implemented to enforce equality and curb discrimination, which provides strong punitive measures that serve as deterrents, to name a few- The Untouchability Practices Act 1955, Protection of Civil Rights Act, Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, etc...

THE LAW AND ITS PURPOSE :-

The POA act specifically addresses offenses like insults, physical harm, and assaults against members of scheduled castes, as well as denying them access to public places and resources, which are also called atrocities under Section 3. There are three main components to this Act: 
-It establishes criminal liability for certain acts which are considered to be atrocities on the SCs and STs; 
-It sets down relief and compensation for victims of such atrocities; and 
-It consists of provisions that establish special authorities for the implementation and monitoring of this Act.

Nevertheless, the implementation of these goals has remained ineffectual, and sometimes it is claimed these goals are merely used as a vengeance by vested interests.

THE DYING HOPE:-

Even though the Constitution mandates that this Act be followed, it has not proved to be a very successful enactment. Innocent civilians and government employees have been blackmailed using the Act, an opinion by the Supreme Court says.
As far as violence against SC/STs goes, it has existed in society for quite some time now. A report tabled in Rajya Sabha: While crimes against women and minors increased by 15.55 percent in 2017-2019, convictions under the PoA Act fell by 26.86 percent in the same period, with pendency rates at an alarming 84.09 percent. As of 2019, there were 7,485 crimes against women, up from 6,321 in 2017. There was a 95.12% acquittal rate of accused cases according to a study, and the reasons for acquittal included:
(a)Delay in lodging FIR
(b)Contradictions in complainants\' and witnesses\' statements, as well as the prosecution\'s failure to conduct a thorough investigation of cases before filing the challans in court.
(c)Witnesses and complainants becoming hostile

The 1989 Act perpetuates caste barriers by submitting bogus complaints to it rather than tearing them down. In early 2018, AK Venugopal on behalf of the Government argued that the Act was amended due to ineffective prosecutions under the 1989 Act. The Supreme Court clarified that protections must be incorporated into the Act to prevent abuse. 

In March 2019, the Supreme Court of India in Subhash Kashinath Mahajan v. State of Maharashtra diluted the stringent provisions made in 2018 and changed the Act significantly. The order said 
(i)Under the Act, a deputy superintendent of police must make a preliminary investigation before filing an FIR; 
(ii)There is no longer a right to immediate arrest when a complaint is lodged; 
(iii)Specifically, it provided that public servants could be arrested only with the permission of their appointing authority. When it comes to private employees, the senior superintendent should permit it.
(iv)The accused may be granted anticipatory bail by the court if they find prima facie that there is no case against them or that the complaint is mala fide. 

Throughout the country, Dalit leaders were dismayed by the verdict, declaring it diluted the real essence of the law. Apparently, this judgment ignores the precedent set by the Apex Court in Lalitha Kumari v. Government of UP, where an FIR must be filed if it contains information that an offence has been committed. 
In late 2020, in the case of Hitesh Verma v. State of Uttarakhand and Anr,  a complaint was filed by a woman belonging to a SCs alleging that a member of an upper-caste community,  entered the “four walls of her building”, made casteist abuses and threatened her with death. The case was filed under Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST Act, which punishes non-SC/ST persons who, “intentionally insults or intimidates with intent to humiliate a member of a SC and STs in any place within public view”. This provision led the apex court to quash the complaint saying intimidation wasn\'t committed in a public place. 
In my opinion, it seems counter-intuitive for legislation to punish caste-based intimidation and humiliation when it occurs "in public view," but continue it privately. What happens to humiliation or oppression aimed at asserting caste power in private?
REASONS FOR  INADEQUATE IN THE ACT:-

According to reports by the National Commission on SC and STs, the government\'s legislation concerning citizens\' rights has three significant flaws which make it less than satisfactory.
●The biased nature of bureaucracy-- Ignorance of complaints, discouragement and even rejection of them, ignoring the version of victims or corroborating the version of the victimizers, deliberately discrediting victims, Loopholes that benefit the accused, encouraging victims to give up the case, pressuring them to compromise, failing to conclude the investigation swiftly, and, above all, failing to protect before or after the offence are some of the manifestations of bias.
●Lack of Special Courts and Special Prosecutors-- Most cases are stalled because there aren\'t enough special courts and prosecutors. To hear such cases, each state\'s revenue district must designate a special court. Almost all Atrocities Act cases are referred to regular sessions courts, which are already overloaded with original and appellate jurisdiction- says Lawyers of People Unions for Civil liberties (TN).
●Influence of Mass Media-- SCs and STs together account for nearly 25% of the population, yet the media, both print and electronic, barely cover their plight/problems. No doubt that when major incidents of violence occur, they are reported on and given some investigative coverage for a while afterward. However, there are no sustained campaigns highlighting their issues, nor is there any conscious and systematic effort to give their voices a voice.

REVERBERATIONS ON HUMAN RIGHTS:-

Although it seems to be a powerful piece of legislation, it is hampered by the police\'s unwillingness to report offenses or their ignorance of the law. The abuses documented are a blatant violation of India\'s Constitution, due to the blemish in the Act. Human rights violations in India are in the forms of women rights violations, caste rights violations, Rape, assault, brutal killing, are very important violations against Dalit women. Fundamental causes like untouchability, community vulnerability, and social exclusion explain the continuous prevalence of this practice.
An estimated 138 million in this community are socially and economically marginalized. The ongoing pandemic has pushed them even further to the brink of vulnerability. Research has linked social exclusion and deprivation of education, health, and a good life to children of this community. Based on the above facts, it can be noted that Dalits continue to suffer discrimination and other heinous crimes despite extensive constitutional provisions. 

To conclude, even though the law is widely interpreted as a way of bringing in stricter sanctions and welfare legislation, it should be interpreted in such a way that it serves the best interests of the beneficiaries. Until the current provisions of the legislation are changed or a comprehensive awareness campaign is undertaken to educate the less fortunate about their rights, the legislation cannot achieve its intended goals.
References :- 

1.The Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 
2.Michael. S.M: Dalits in Modern India, vision and values, Second Edition.
3.IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, Volume 8, Issue 1 (Jan. - Feb. 2013), PP 53-59 
4.Human Rights Watch report, 1999, Failure to Meet Domestic and International: Legal Obligations to Protect Dalits - Broken People: Caste Violence Against India’s “Untouchables” 
5.The Print, Crimes against SC/ST women, children up 15%, but conviction rate low. 
6.Ayan Guha, Recent Debate on landmark anti-caste legislation in India, International Journal of Dicrimination and the Law, 2019, Vol. 19(1) 48–63.