Using "Chamar" in Staffroom Not an Offense under SC/ST Act, as It's Not a Public Place : Madhya Pradesh HC

Using "Chamar" in Staffroom Not an Offense under SC/ST Act, as It's Not a Public Place : Madhya Pradesh HC

The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently dismissed a criminal case filed under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act) because the alleged incident occurred within a staff room, which the Court deemed not to be a public location.

The bench headed by Justice Vishal Dhagat was hearing a matter in which the accused petitioners were accused of using caste-based slurs, specifically targeting the complainant's caste, Chamar, during a staffroom meeting.

The Court emphasized that Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST Act makes it an offense to intentionally insult or intimidate a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe in any place "within the public view."

“It is clear that offence shall be committed in a public view to make out an offence under Section Section 3(1)(x) of SC & ST (POA) Act. Staff room is not a place within public view, therefore, no offence under Section 3(1)(x) of SC & ST (POA) Act is made out against petitioners," stated the order.

Furthermore, the Court also nullified a charge under section 294 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which pertains to obscene acts and songs, as the alleged verbal abuse occurred within the confines of the staff room, which is not accessible to the general public without the school's permission, as per the Court's rationale.

Since the staff room is not a "place within public view", no offence would lie against the accused, the Court held.

Additionally, the Court determined that the charge of criminal intimidation under Section 506 of the IPC was not applicable to the petitioners. This decision was based on the complainant's failure to claim that he had felt threatened or alarmed when he was allegedly subjected to the abuse, according to the Court's reasoning.

After hearing an arguements, the Court proceeded to quash the entire criminal proceeding pending before Chief Judicial Magistrate in Shahdol in the matter.

Advocate Vipin Yadav represented the petitioners (accused), whereas Government Advocate Akshay Namdeo represented the State government.

Case Title - Ashutosh Tiwari vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh

 

 

 
 
Share this News

Website designed, developed and maintained by webexy