- By Abhinav Gupta
- Tue, 01 Oct 2019 12:39 PM (IST)
- Source:JND
New Delhi | Jagran News Desk: The Supreme Court on Tuesday allowed the review petition filed by the Centre against its March 2018 decision that had effectively diluted the provisions of the SC/ST Act.
The development paves way for withdrawal of ban on automatic arrest in cases under Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Act), 1989, and the need for sanction before arrests linked to violation of the law.
The Supreme Court said the struggle of SC/STs for equality and civil rights was still not over. "They are still discriminated against. Untouchability has not vanished and those involved in scavenging have still not been provided modern facilities," the court noted.
The top court had on September 18, criticised the verdict delivered by its two-judge bench on March 20 last year and had observed whether a judgment could be passed against the spirit of the Constitution.
Indicating that it would pass certain directions to "bring in equality" as per the provisions of the law, the top court had said people belonging to scheduled castes and scheduled tribes are subjected to "discrimination" and "untouchability" even after over 70 years of Independence.
Taking a serious view of the manual scavenging situation and deaths of SC/ST people engaged in such work, the top court had said nowhere in the world people are sent to "gas chambers to die".
On September 13, the top court had referred to a three-judge bench the Centre's plea, which was filed nearly 18 months ago, seeking review of its judgment which had virtually diluted the provisions of arrest under the SC/ST Act.
The apex court's March 20, 2018, verdict had led to a massive outcry and protests by different SC/ST organisations across India after which Parliament passed the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2018, to neutralise the effects of the judgment.
In the verdict, the apex court had taken note of the rampant misuse of the stringent SC/ST Act against government servants and private individuals and said there would be no immediate arrest on any complaint filed under the law.
It had said on "several occasions", innocent citizens were being termed as accused and public servants deterred from performing their duties, which was never the intention of the legislature while enacting the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
The apex court had said that there is no absolute bar against grant of anticipatory bail in cases under the Atrocities Act, if no prima facie case is made out or where the complaint is found to be prima facie malafide.
It had said that in view of the acknowledged abuse of law of arrest in cases under the Atrocities Act, arrest of a public servant can only be after approval of the appointing authority and of a non-public servant after approval by the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP).
