SC RECALLS ITS ORDER ON SC/ST ACT VIJAYALAKSHMI RAJU BASICS OF LAW Thu, Oct 31, 2019, at ,06:30 AM The Supreme Court has set aside its earlier judgment on March 20, 2018, which introduced measures such as prior inquiry before the arrest of an accused under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Act), 1989. The verdict had virtually diluted the provisions of arrest under the SC/ST Act. A bench of justices Arun Mishra, M.R. Shah and B.R. Gavai said on October 1 that the struggle of SCs / STs for equality is still not over. The bench said SCs / STs still face untouchability, abuse and are being socially outcast. The apex court further said the Constitution provides for the protection of SCs / STs under Article 15, but they still face social abuse and discrimination. Dealing with the misuse of provisions of the SC / ST Act and lodging of false cases, the bench said it is not due to the caste system but due to human failure. The apex court’s earlier verdict had led to a massive outcry and protests by different SC / ST organizations across India after which Parliament passed the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2018, to neutralize the effects of the judgment. BACKGROUND The Supreme Court on March 20, 2018, diluted its stringent provisions mandating immediate arrest under the law in a bid to protect honest public servants discharging bonafide duties from being blackmailed with false cases under the SC / ST Act. The apex court said that 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 SC / ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. It had said that in view of the acknowledged abuse of law of arrest in cases under the Atrocities Act, the 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). The 1989 Act penalizes casteist insults and even denies anticipatory bail to the suspected offenders. The Supreme Court justified its verdict on the SC / ST Act, saying even Parliament cannot allow the arrest of a person without a fair procedure and asserted that it has protected the fundamental rights to life and liberty of innocents by ordering prior scrutiny of complaints. The Centre opposed the verdict saying that courts cannot order to supplant or substitute a provision in the law enacted by Parliament. Several states were rocked by widespread violence and clashes following a Bharat Bandh call given by several SC / ST organizations protesting the apex court’s order, which claimed many lives. AMENDMENT BILL GETS PARLIAMENT NOD The NDA government decided to bring a Constitution Amendment Bill in Parliament to restore the original provisions of the SC / ST Act. It was passed by the Lok Sabha on August 6, 2018, and in Rajya Sabha on August 9, 2018. Section 18A was inserted to nullify the conduct of a preliminary inquiry before registration of an FIR, or to seek approval of any authority prior to the arrest of an accused, and to restore the provisions of Section 18 of the Act. Section 18A, inserted in the Act, states that… * Preliminary inquiry shall not be required for registration of an FIR against any person. * The investigating officer shall not require approval for an arrest, if necessary, of any person, against whom an accusation of having committed an offense under the SC / ST Act has been made and no procedure other than provided under the SC / ST Act or the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, shall apply. * The provision of Section 438 of the Code shall not apply to a case under the Act, notwithstanding any judgment or order or direction of any court. SC ACCEPTS REVIEW PETITION The Centre had also filed a review petition against the SC order. Several pleas are also filed challenging the new amendments made in the SC / ST verdict. During the hearing of review plea this year, the apex court criticized the verdict delivered by its two-judge bench on March 20 and had observed whether a judgment could be passed against the spirit of the Constitution. Taking a serious view of the manual scavenging situation and deaths of SCs / STs engaged in such work, the apex court had said nowhere in the world people are sent to “gas chambers to die”. “It is against the spirit of the Constitution. Can an order be passed against the statute and the Constitution just because there is an abuse of the law? Can you doubt any person on the basis of caste? Even a general category person can file a false FIR,” the bench had said.