Apex Court finds no specific evidence of caste-based insult or overt acts against the appellant, dismisses criminal proceedings to prevent miscarriage of justice
In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court of India has quashed the criminal proceedings against Keshaw Mahto, who was accused under Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, and several provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The appellant, Keshaw Mahto, was alleged to have been involved in an incident that took place at an Aanganwadi Center in Santhali Tola, where abuses were reportedly hurled at the complainant, a member of a Scheduled Caste.
The bench, consisting of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and Alok Aradhe, scrutinized the allegations and found that the prosecution failed to establish any specific overt act or caste-based insult attributable to Mahto. The court emphasized that the mere presence of an accused at the scene of the offence does not suffice to constitute liability under the SC/ST Act or the IPC.
The court referred to its earlier judgment in Shajan Skaria v. The State of Kerala, outlining the necessary ingredients to constitute offences under the SC/ST Act. The judgment reiterated that to attract the provisions of Section 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s), there must be a clear intention to insult or intimidate with a caste-based motive, which was absent in this case.
The Supreme Court observed that the FIR and chargesheet did not provide any evidence of caste-based abuse or specific involvement of Mahto in the alleged acts. Consequently, the court concluded that continuing the prosecution would result in a miscarriage of justice.
The court's decision overturns the previous order of the High Court of Judicature at Patna, which had dismissed Mahto's appeal challenging the cognizance and summoning order of the trial court. The Supreme Court's ruling underscores the importance of establishing clear and specific allegations to prosecute individuals under the SC/ST Act and the IPC, thereby safeguarding individuals from unjust criminal trials.
Bottom Line:
Mere presence of an accused at the scene of the offence, without specific overt acts or intentional insult or intimidation with the intent to humiliate a member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, does not constitute an offence under Sections 3(1)(r) or 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST Act.
Statutory provision(s): Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989; Sections 341, 323, 504, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Keshaw Mahto @ Keshaw Kumar Mahto v. State of Bihar, (SC) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2839603
