Court Rules Intent and Mens Rea Absent in Alleged Violation of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act
Mumbai, December 23, 2025 - The Bombay High Court, in a significant ruling, has quashed the FIR against the Programming Head and Executive Producer of a Marathi television channel, Star Pravah, concerning allegations under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Indian Penal Code, and Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955. The FIR was filed due to the airing of dialogues containing caste references in the Marathi serial "Laxmi versus Saraswati."
The writ petitions, numbered 4546 and 4547 of 2013, filed by Shrabani Deodhar and others, challenged the FIR, arguing the absence of intent or mens rea to insult or humiliate members of Scheduled Castes as required under Section 3(1)(x) of the Atrocities Act. The FIR alleged that a dialogue aired on August 22, 2012, contained words perceived as derogatory and insulting to members of the Mahar caste.
Justice Manish Pitale and Justice Manjusha Deshpande, presiding over the case, noted that the basic ingredients of the alleged offences were not met. They emphasized that mere airing of dialogues with caste names does not constitute an offence unless it is shown that such words were used intentionally to insult or humiliate members of Scheduled Castes or Tribes.
The court further observed that neither the Programming Head nor the Executive Producer was responsible for the creation of the content in question. The serial was produced by Reliance Broadcast Network Limited, and the objectionable dialogue was not part of the original script but was uttered spontaneously by an actor. The court clarified that criminal prosecution requires strict examination of intent and specific allegations against the accused.
In support of the petitioners' stance, several precedents were cited, including judgments from the Supreme Court emphasizing the necessity of proving mens rea for offences under Section 295A of the IPC, which pertains to acts intended to outrage religious feelings.
The Bombay High Court's judgment underscored the importance of demonstrating intent and the role of individuals involved in the broadcast of content. The court concluded that the FIR did not meet the criteria for criminal proceedings, as the petitioners did not intentionally use the words to insult or intimidate.
This ruling highlights the judicial scrutiny required in cases involving allegations under the Atrocities Act, ensuring that the fundamental rights of individuals are protected against unwarranted prosecution. The court's decision to quash the FIR is seen as reaffirmation of the principle that criminal liability must be based on clear evidence of intent and not mere association with the content aired.
The decision comes as a relief to the petitioners, including the Programming Head and Executive Producer, who faced accusations despite their limited role in the production process. The judgment reinforces the necessity of demonstrating intent in cases under the Atrocities Act, IPC, and PCR Act, protecting individuals from baseless legal proceedings.
Bottom Line:
Mere use of caste names in dialogues of a television serial does not constitute an offence under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, unless it is shown that the use of such words was intentional, aimed at insulting or humiliating a member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe.
Statutory provision(s): Scheduled Castes and The Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 Section 3(1)(x), Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 295A, Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955 Section 7(1)(d), Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 482.
Shrabani Deodhar v. State of Maharashtra, (Bombay)(DB) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2826301
