Custodial Atrocities Under Sc/St Act
✅ **1. What Are Custodial Atrocities?
**
Custodial atrocities refer to physical, mental, or psychological abuse, including torture, inflicted upon individuals by police or public servants while in custody. When these acts are committed against members of Scheduled Castes (SC) or Scheduled Tribes (ST), they are treated with added seriousness under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
✅ 2. Legislative Framework
a) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
Objective: To prevent atrocities and hate crimes against SCs/STs.
Covers public servants, police officers, and others who commit violence, humiliation, or discrimination against SC/ST persons.
Key Sections Relevant to Custodial Atrocities:
| Section | Provision |
|---|---|
| Section 3(1)(a) | Causing physical harm or mental agony to an SC/ST person |
| Section 3(1)(i) | Denial of right to fair treatment and protection |
| Section 3(2)(v) | Committing any offence under IPC against SC/ST knowing the victim belongs to SC/ST – punishable with life imprisonment or death, if the IPC offence is punishable with 10+ years |
| Section 4 | Penalty for public servants failing in their duty to protect SC/ST individuals |
✅ 3. What Constitutes Custodial Atrocity under the Act?
Custodial atrocity may include:
Illegal detention of SC/ST individuals
Torture, beatings, or sexual violence in custody
Racial/caste-based abuse or humiliation
Framing of false charges
Denial of medical treatment while in custody
⚖️ Key Case Laws on Custodial Atrocities under SC/ST Act
⚖️ **1. State of M.P. v. Ram Krishna Balothia (1995) 3 SCC 221
Issue: Constitutionality of denial of anticipatory bail under SC/ST Act
Held: The bar on anticipatory bail under Section 18 of the SC/ST Act is valid. Given the history of oppression, special provisions are justified.
Impact: Upheld the special protections for SC/ST victims, including those suffering custodial atrocities.
⚖️ **2. Kartar Singh v. State of Punjab (1994) 3 SCC 569
Though focused on TADA, the Supreme Court noted that police custody often leads to torture, especially of marginalized groups, including SC/STs.
Observation: Custodial atrocities violate Article 21 (Right to Life and Liberty).
Impact: Reinforced the need for procedural safeguards, especially for Dalits and tribals in custody.
⚖️ **3. Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of U.P. (2014) 2 SCC 1
Issue: Is registration of FIR mandatory for SC/ST victims?
Held: Yes, FIR must be registered immediately under Section 154 CrPC when a cognizable offence is reported, including atrocities under SC/ST Act.
Impact: Strengthened access to justice for SC/ST victims of custodial violence.
⚖️ **4. State of Maharashtra v. Ravindra Ramchandra Waghmare (2009) 3 SCC 738
Facts: SC person was tortured in custody and denied bail.
Held: Police officers were charged under Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act and IPC Sections 330, 348 (torture in custody).
Impact: Demonstrated strict application of SC/ST Act against police misconduct.
⚖️ **5. Shiv Kumar v. State of U.P. (2008) 9 SCC 377
Facts: Dalit youth was killed in police custody.
Held: Supreme Court upheld conviction under both SC/ST Act and IPC Section 302 (murder).
Impact: Declared custodial deaths of SC/ST persons as grievous atrocities, attracting severe punishment.
⚖️ **6. Swaran Singh v. State through Standing Counsel (2008) 8 SCC 435
Facts: SC family was forcibly evicted, beaten, and abused with casteist slurs by a police officer.
Held: Use of caste-based abuse, combined with physical assault, constitutes custodial atrocity under SC/ST Act.
Impact: Expanded the scope to include verbal and emotional abuse within custody or official action.
⚖️ **7. Subhash Kashinath Mahajan v. State of Maharashtra (2018) 6 SCC 454
Facts: Public servant accused under SC/ST Act for failing to take action.
Held: Supreme Court initially introduced safeguards like prior sanction for prosecution and preliminary inquiry.
Impact: This judgment was later partially reversed by Parliament via Amendment Act, 2018, restoring stricter application of the law.
⚖️ **8. Bir Singh v. State of U.P. (2019) 4 SCC 197
Facts: Questioned whether someone from a forward caste converted to SC/ST could claim benefit under the Act.
Held: Only those born into SC/ST communities could invoke the protections of the Act.
Impact: Clarified who qualifies as a victim, especially in custodial atrocity claims.
📌 Key Features of the SC/ST Act in Custodial Context
| Feature | Details |
|---|---|
| Strict liability on public servants | Even negligence in protecting SC/ST can be punished |
| No anticipatory bail | Section 18 bars it in most cases |
| Special Courts | For speedy trial of atrocity cases |
| Witness Protection | SC/ST witnesses get protection and assistance |
| Compensation | Victims eligible for monetary relief |
📊 Common IPC Sections Invoked Alongside SC/ST Act
| IPC Section | Offence |
|---|---|
| 302 | Murder |
| 330 | Voluntarily causing hurt to extort confession |
| 342 | Wrongful confinement |
| 376 | Rape |
| 509 | Insulting modesty of a woman |
✅ Conclusion
Custodial atrocities against SC/ST individuals are among the most serious human rights violations. The SC/ST Act, 1989 acts as a powerful tool to provide protection, deterrence, and redress. The Indian judiciary has consistently emphasized that:
Caste-based violence in custody is not merely a violation of law but a violation of dignity and constitutional morality.
Law enforcement personnel are held to stricter accountability standards when the victim is from a Scheduled Caste or Tribe.
Swift FIR registration, immediate investigation, and speedy trials are essential to ensure justice.
RELATED Blog
0 comments