Shocking That Many Innocent Persons Are Victims Of False Cases Under SC/ST Prevention Of Atrocities Act : Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court on Friday observed that many innocent persons are victims of false implication under the SC/ST (POA) Act.

"It is shocking, rather a mind blowing fact that many innocent persons are victims of false implication under the SC/ST (POA) Act", the Court observed while considering an application seeking anticipatory bail.  It cautioned that possibility of false implications of innocent people as accused, with a view to achieve ulterior motives of the complainant, must be ruled out.

Noting that many innocent persons are falling victim to false implications under the SC/ST (POA) Act, Justice A. Badharudeen observed that

...the courts should have a duty to rule out the possibilities of false implication of innocent persons as accused, with a view to achieve ulterior motives of the complaints, with threat of arrest and detention of the accused in custody, because of the stringent provisions in the SC/ST (POA) Act in the matter of grant of anticipatory bail.

Therefore, it is the need of the hour for the courts to segregate the grain from the chaff by analysing the genesis of the case, the antecedents prior to registration of the crime, with reference to existence of animosity between the complainant and the accused, with particular attention, vis-a-vis previous disputes/cases/ complaints, etc. while considering the question of prima facie case, when considering plea for pre-arrest bail.

Remarking on the nature of the SC/ST (POA) Act, the Court observed that stringent provisions were incorporated in the statute to arrest the menace of atrocities against members of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes community by exploiting their backwardness.

"Since the Parliament found that the provisions of earlier SC/ST (POA) Act were not sufficient to meet the ends of justice, the Act was amended. After the amendment of the SC/ST (POA) Act, more stringent provisions have been incorporated in SC/ST (POA) Act with mandatory right of hearing to the defacto complainant at every stages of the court proceedings, as provided under Section 15A(3) of the SCT/ST (POA) Act. Thus, atrocities against Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe community, in fact, is intended to be curtailed by the stringent provisions of SC/ST (POA) Act".

It therefore observed that when genuine complaints at the instance of the Schedule Caste or Scheduled Tribe members, which would attract the offences under the SC/ST (POA) Act, if made, the same shall be viewed seriously and appropriate legal action shall go on, to attend the grievances of the complaint(s). 

The Court however, sought to address the issue of innocent persons being made victims to false implications under the statute, herein. 

The instant Appeal was filed challenging the order of the Special Judge disallowing pre-arrest bail. 

The allegation of the prosecution was that the accused called the caste name of the defacto complainant, who belongs to the Scheduled Castes community when he came to Valappad Service Co-operative Bank for remitting the interest towards the gold loan availed by him, thereby committing an offence under Section 3 (1)(s) of the SC/ST (POA) Act. Here, the accused who is an employee of the bank does not belong to the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes community. 

The Court observed that in cases where there are materials to show that the accused and the complainant are in inimical terms, and there are previous litigation between them or their men or representatives and in retaliation or as a sequel to the same, the allegations in the complaint constituting offence/offences under the SC/ST (POA) Act are made, the same may be the reasons to doubt the case prima facie. 

The Court further observed that on evaluation of the genesis of the case within the ambit of the aforesaid pari materia, if the court finds something to see the possibility of false implication, in such cases, the court could very well hold that prima facie, the prosecution allegations could not be believed for the purpose of denying anticipatory bail, after leaving the question as to the commission of offence for a detailed and fair investigation by the Investigating Officer.

Indubitably, such a course of action is necessary to rule out the possibility of false implication, the Court added. 

On the facts of the case, the Court observed that the present crime was registered during the currency of the 'internal inquiry' at the instance of the husband of an employee of the Bank. The appellant herein lodged complaint against the Secretary of the Bank, raising serious allegations of sexual harassment, and had also made many complaints in this regard to various authorities. 

"In such a case, the contention raised by the appellant to the effect that, the present complaint at the instance of the husband of an employee of the Bank is with intention to falsely implicate the appellant in serious offence under the SC/ST (POA) Act could not be ruled out. In such a case, the case advanced by the defacto complainant is prima facie doubtful. However, investigation can go on in a fair manner to unearth the truth of the allegations and I leave the same to the domain of Investigating Officer, in tact and the observations made in this judgment are confined, for the purpose of considering pre-arrest bail plea", the Court observed.

The Court thus allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order.

The accused appellant was granted pre-arrest bail on the following conditions:

Firstly, that the appellant/accused shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today and on such surrender, the Investigating Officer can question the accused/appellant. In the event of her arrest, the Investigating Officer shall produce the accused/appellant before the Special Court on the date of surrender itself; 

Secondly, on such production, Special Court shall release the appellant/accused on bail, on executing bond for Rs.30,000/- each, by himself and by two sureties, each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Special Judge; 

Thirdly, the appellant/accused shall co-operate with investigation and shall be made available for interrogation and for the purpose of investigation, as and when the Investigating Officer is directs so; and 

Lastly, that the appellant / accused, shall not, intimidate the witnesses or interfere with the investigation in any manner.

Advocates S. Rajeev, V. Vinay, M.S. Aneer, Prerith Philip John, Sarath K.P., and Anilkumar C.P. appeared on behalf of the appellant accused in the instant case. The respondents were represented by Public Prosecutor G. Sudheer, and Advocates R. Rohith, and Harishma P. Thampi. 

Case Title: X v. State of Kerala & Anr. 

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 650

Click Here To Read/Download The Order