Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 was enacted by the Parliament of India to prevent atrocities and hate crimes against the so called scheduled castes and scheduled tribes in the country. In popular usage, including in parliamentary debates and in the judgements of the Supreme Court of India, this law is referred to as the SC/ST Act. It is also referred to as the 'Atrocities Act', POA, and PoA.
Recognising the continuing gross indignities and offences against the scheduled castes and tribes, the Indian parliament enacted the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 when the existing legal provisions were found to be inadequate to check these caste and ethnicity based hate crimes.
The Act was passed in Parliament of India on 11 September 1989 and notified on 30 January 1990. It was comprehensively amended in 2015, and notified on 26 January 2016. It was amended again in 2018 and 2019.
The rules were notified on 31 March 1995. They were comprehensively amended and notified on 14 April 2016. There were a few amendments to the rules and annexures in 2018.
Background
Atrocities rooted in caste system
A study conducted by the National Commission for SCs and STs in 1990 on Atrocities on Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes: Causes and Remedies pointed out various causal factors for atrocities: land disputes; land alienation; bonded labour; indebtedness; non-payment of minimum wages; caste prejudice and practice of untouchability; political factions on caste lines; refusal to perform traditional works such as digging burial pits, arranging cremations, removing carcasses of dead animals and beating drums; etc. The deep root for such atrocities is traceable to the caste system, which "encompasses a complete ordering of social groups on the basis of the so-called ritual purity. A person is considered a member of the caste into which s/he is born and remains within that caste until death…."Considered ritually impure, Dalits have been physically and socially excluded from caste Hindu society, denied basic resources and services, and discriminated against in all areas of life. Consequently, they face various forms of exploitation, insults, and violence, as well as degrading practices of untouchability. The Scheduled Tribes are equally exploited on grounds of not falling within the caste system but having a distinct culture and worldview of their own. "Women belonging to these castes and tribes bore double burden. They were exploited by caste and gender, and were vulnerable and powerless against sexual exploitation".
The post-Independence era was marked by frequent instances of atrocities springing up across the country: for example, the assassination of the young, educated Dalit leader Emmanuel Sekaran in Tamil Nadu for defying the untouchability-based interdicts on Scheduled Castes, which resulted in the Ramanathapuram riots of 1957; the Kilavenmani massacre of 42 Dalits in 1968 in Tamil Nadu; the gruesome killing of Dalit Kotesu in Kanchikacherla in 1969 in Andhra Pradesh; the killings of 10 Scheduled Tribes by police in connection with a land dispute in Indravalli in Andhra Pradesh in 1978. All such events shook the then national leadership. Hence, under pressure from Dalit MPs, the Government of India started monitoring atrocities against Dalits from 1974, and in the case of Adivasis from 1981 onwards, with special focus on murder, rape, arson and grievous hurt.
Atrocities continued to increase in ferocity and frequency – for example, in Bihar the massacres of Dalits at Belchi in 1979 and at Pipra in 1980; in Uttar Pradesh the massacre following a Dalit bridegroom riding on horseback at Kafalta in 1980; in Madhya Pradesh the killing of Bacchdas in Mandsaur district in 1982; in Bihar the killing in police firing on 15 tribals at Banjhi in Sahebganj district in 1985. In all such cases, the Indian state at both the national and state levels avoided addressing basic contradictions, vulnerabilities and causative factors; the treatment was mainly symptomatic and palliative instead of the required radical solutions.
Continuing widespread prevalence
As late as 29 October 2021, the Supreme Court of India was constrained Atrocities against members of the SCs and STs are not a thing of the past. They continue to be a reality in our society even today. Hence the statutory provisions which have been enacted by Parliament as a measure of protecting the constitutional rights of persons belonging to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes must be complied with and enforced conscientiously.They went on to note that several members of the scheduled communities “face insurmountable hurdles in accessing justice from the stage of filing the complaint to the conclusion of the trial” and that they “specifically suffer on account of procedural lapses in the criminal justice system”.
They noted that due to the fear of retribution from members of dominant caste groups, ignorance, or police apathy, many victims do not register complaints in the first place and when they do so, the police officials are reluctant to register complaints or do not record allegations accurately.
“Eventually, if the case does get registered, the victims and witnesses are vulnerable to intimidation, violence, and social and economic boycott. Further, many perpetrators of caste-based atrocities get away scot free due to shoddy investigations and the negligence of prosecuting advocates,” rued the bench. “This results in low conviction rates under the SC/ST Act, giving rise to the erroneous perception that cases registered under the Act are false and that it is being misused. On the contrary, the reality is that many acquittals are a result of improper investigation and prosecution of crime, leading to insufficient evidence”.
Legislative history
Constitutional roots
The Act is rooted in Articles 15 and 17 of the Indian Constitution. Article 15 prohibits discrimination on the basis of caste. Article 17 of the Constitution of India states that ‘Untouchability is abolished and its practice in any form is forbidden. The enforcement of any disability arising out of “Untouchability” shall be an offence punishable in accordance with law’.The Untouchability (Offences) Act, 1955
Five years after the Constitution of India was adopted, the necessary legislation - the Untouchability Act 1955 - was enacted. It was amended and renamed in 1976 as the Protection of Civil Rights Act.Though UOA did not precisely define the offence, it was a major step forward, and had several enabling provisions. UOA recognised ‘wilful negligence’ and was proactive in that it stated clearly that the presumption of court would be that the crime arose from ‘untouchability’ and it was the defendant who should prove that it wasn't . The Act was farsighted in that it recognised the culpability of companies and those in charge, including their directors .
However, due to legal loopholes, the levels of punishments being less, and the law and order machinery being neither professionally trained nor socially inclined to implement such social legislation, a more comprehensive deterrent Act was required to protect the scheduled communities from inter-community violence committed by the dominant communities.
The Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955
It was later recognised that the Untouchability Act 1955 was not sufficient to eradicate untouchability and to punish the perpetrators. So the parliament brought about many changes to UOA after 21 years on 19 November 1976, and renamed it the Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955. In the 1976 amendment, discrimination on the basis of untouchability was also brought under this Act . 'Untouchability' as a result of religious and social disabilities was made punishable. The amendments made it clear that all offences under this Act are cognisable . It made mandatory the provision of legal aid, appointment of supervising officers, setting up of special courts and committees, and periodic survey of the working of the provisions of this Act to suggest measures for the better implementation . It even had provision for state and central government annual implementation reports being placed before parliament . Much of this is carried forward to POA and its amendments, though the liability of companies has been removed.However, PCRA suffered from severe infirmities, chief among them being that it did not even recognise many of the caste based crimes, was too lenient, and did not have an empowered mechanism to monitor the implementation of the Act.
Consequently, caste based crimes continued and even increased both in intensity and scale. Under continued pressure from Dalit MPs and political leaders, the magnitude and gravity of the problem was finally recognised by Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi. In his Independence day address on 15 August 1987, he announced that an Act would be passed, if necessary, to check atrocities. This nudged the parliament to legislate the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989.
The POA and amendments
Instead of tinkering with the PCRA, the parliament of India passed a new legislation to explicitly prevent offences against the scheduled communities by members of non-scheduled communities, that would set up speedy justice, monitoring, accountability, relief, and rehabilitation mechanisms. The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 was thus passed on 11 September 1989. The Act was notified in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, sec. 3, dated 29 January 1990 and came into force on 30 January 1990. The rules were notified on 31 March 1995.The 1989 Act and 1995 rules underwent substantial amendments in 2013, 2014, 2015, 2018, and 2019. The 8 November 2013 amendment to the Rules inserted Rule 17A that added vigilance and monitoring committees at the sub-divisional level, and provided for nominees of the union government in the vigilance and monitoring committees.
The rules were amended on 23 June 2014 to enhance relief and rehabilitation.
The Amendment Ordinance 2014 was signed by the president on 4 March 2014 - the last day before the model code of conduct for parliamentary elections came into force - and came into force immediately. Unsurprisingly, dominant communities campaigned for the total repeal of the Act during the parliamentary elections. Since it was an ordinance, and was not ratified by parliament within six months, it lapsed. It was then referred back to the cabinet.
It was later passed as the Amendment Act 2015 and the Amendment Rules 2016. The Amendment Act 2015 and Amendment Rules 2016 comprehensively overhauled the parent Act and Rules. The Act added Chapter IVA Section 15A, and defined dereliction of duty by officials and accountability mechanisms more precisely. It added several new offences in Section 3 and renumbered the entire section since the recognised crime almost doubled. It filled several gaps in the previous version of the Act apart from making accountability of officials clearer. Section 14A to ensure time bound trials was also inserted. The amended Act 2015 came into effect on 26 January 2016.
The amended rules enhance and streamline relief and rehabilitation, with clear timelines and deliverables. The amended Rules came into effect on 14 April 2016.
The Supreme Court of India, in its verdict of 20 March 2018, banned immediate arrest of a person accused of insulting or injuring a member of a scheduled community to prevent arbitrary arrest. This led to a furore, which in turn led to a stunned parliament voting to overturn the judgement. In August 2018, the parliament passed an amendment to override the ruling by inserting section 18A 'preliminary enquiry shall not be required for registration of an FIR against any person and section 18A, the investigating officer shall not require approval for the arrest, if necessary, of any person against whom an accusation of having committed an offence under this Act has been made and no procedure, other than that provided under this Act or the Code, shall apply. The amendments categorically rule out anticipatory bail for a person accused of atrocities against the scheduled communities, notwithstanding any court order. The Supreme Court of India upheld the constitutional validity of the amendment on 10 February 2020.
On 27 June 2018 the Rules were amended to clarify that the relief provided in the Rule 15 contingency plan and Rule 12 Annexe Schedule I was in addition to relief from other sources , removed the restriction of 25 members in the State Vigilance and Monitoring Committee , and tweaked the relief provisions in the Rule 12 Annexe Schedule I.
On 31 October 2019, Section 1 was amended to extend the Act to the whole of India.