Caste slur an offence if made in public: HC

MUMBAI: Casteist slurs have to be made in a public place for it to be an offence under the Atrocities Act, the Bombay high court said in an important ruling recently. In a repreive to government servant Sunil Madane, a Satara resident, a division bench of Justices Satyaranjan Dharmadhikari and Prakash Naik granted him interim protection from arrest.
“Prima facie, on a reading of the complaint, the abuses which have been hurled at the complainant by the accused are not within public view,” said the two-judge division bench. The court also pointed out that provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act requires that for an offence to be made out, the intentional insult or intimidation with intent to humiliate a member of a scheduled caste or a scheduled tribe should be in a place within public view.

‘It is the place which is prima face required to be within public view,” said the high court bench, adding, “(the arguments of the prosecution) that there are two eyewitnesses who have witnessed this incident prima facie would not suffice”.

Section 18 of the anti-atrocities law prohibits grant of anticipatory bail to an accused who has been booked under the Act. The only exceptions are if prima facie no case is made out or if the court comes to the conclusion that the allegations are mala fide.

The case against Madane was filed by his neighbour with whom he has had a prior dispute. According to the first information report filed in the Phaltan city police station, Madane had allegedly accosted the woman and threatened her to withdraw the case that she had registered against him. He had then allegedly abused the woman, who belongs to the Hindu Mahar community, in the name of her caste.

Madane claimed that he was falsely implicated in the case and, if arrested, he might lose his job. The prosecution opposed the plea and contended that the accused had abused the woman in a filthy language and had made disparaging remarks in the name of her caste. The prosecution said that they needed to interrogate the accused in custody and recover the car used in the crime. Earlier this year, a sessions court had rejected Madane’s plea for pre-arrest bail. The sessions court had said that the accused had abused the complainant in the presence of two persons and therefore it meant that he had abused her in public view.

The court said that if Madane is arrested, he should be released on a Rs 50,000 bail and one or two sureties.