Supreme Court upholds SC/ST Amendment Act

 

The Supreme Court has upheld the constitutional validity of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2018.

  • The Amendment Act nullified the Court’s 20th March, 2018 judgment which had diluted the stringent provisions of the original Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
  • Petitions were filed challenging the 2018 Amendment Act on the grounds of violation of the fundamental right to equality (Article 14) and personal liberty (Article 21).

Salient Features of the Amendment Act, 2018

  • It added Section 18A to the original Act.
  • It delineates SPECIFIC CRIMES against SCs & STs as atrocities and describes strategies and prescribes punishments to counter these acts.
  • It identifies what acts constitute “atrocities and all offences listed in the Act are COGNIZABLE. The police can arrest the offender without a warrant and start an investigation into the case without taking any orders from the court.
  • The Act calls upon all the states to convert an existing SESSIONS COURT in each district into SPECIAL COURT to try cases registered under it and provides for the appointment of Public Prosecutors/Special Public Prosecutors for conducting cases in special courts.
  • It creates provisions for states to declare areas with high levels of caste violence to be ATROCITY-PRONE and to appoint qualified officers to monitor and maintain law and order.
  • It provides for the punishment for wilful neglect of duties by non-SC/ST public servants.
  • It is implemented by the State Governments and Union Territory Administrations, which are provided due central assistance.

Section 18A states that

  • For the Prevention of Atrocities Act, the preliminary enquiry shall not be required for registration of a FIR against any person.
  • The provision of section 438 (pre-arrest bail) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) shall not apply to a case under the Act, notwithstanding any judgment or order or direction of any Court.
  • The provision of anticipatory bail under Section 438 was introduced when Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) was amended in 1973.
  • Anticipatory bail is a direction to release a person on bail, issued EVEN BEFORE THE PERSON IS ARRESTED. It is only issued by the Sessions Court and High Court.
  • An application for anticipatory bail can be filed in cases of non-bailable offences.
  • Time limit: The Supreme Court (SC) in Sushila Aggarwal v. State of NCT of Delhi (2020) case ruled that no time limit can be set while granting anticipatory Bail and it can continue even until the end of the trial.
  • Need for such protection
    • An accused, besides being an accused, may also be the primary caregiver or sole breadwinner of the family. His arrest may leave his loved ones in a state of starvation and neglect.
    • In the 1980 Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia vs State of Punjab case, a five-judge Supreme Court bench led by then Chief Justice Y V Chandrachud ruled that 438 (1) is to be interpreted in the light of Article 21 of the Constitution (protection of life and personal liberty).

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Mandsaur Inscription of Kumaragupta

Later Vedic Period

Prelim Bits (CA) 3 June 2023