Allahabad High Court – Under Section 3(1)(r) of the SC/ST Act, it is necessary that the crime should have been committed in a public place, let’s understand

Related Articles

Waqf Board Bill: AIMIM leader Waris Pathan said that if BJP brings such black laws then it is not good for the constitution and secularism of the country, what will be the next step of Owaisi’s AIMIM? Announced

3 hours ago

Delhi: More than 400 vehicles seized by the traffic police were burnt to ashes due to fire in the police storehouse located at Nehru Place in Delhi, FIR registered to find out if there is any conspiracy, it took more than 3 hours to control the fire

4 hours ago

Jammu Kashmir: Shiv Sena demands declaration of timeline for restoration of statehood to Jammu and Kashmir…Party to stage protests during visits of Union ministers.

4 hours ago

ALLAHABAD HC: Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, which is also commonly known as SC-ST Act. Allahabad High Court has given a big decision regarding this. Issuing a big order, Allahabad High Court said that the alleged act of intentional insult will be a crime under the SC ST Act only if it is done in a public place. Along with this, the court partially accepted the petition of petitioner Pintu Singh and two others and canceled the case against them in relation to SC ST Act.

What is the whole matter?

In fact, a case was registered against petitioner Pintu Kumar and two others in November 2017 under various sections of the Indian Penal Code and section 3 (1) (R) of the SC ST Act. The case alleged that the accused entered the complainant’s house and abused them with caste-related abuses and beat him and his family.

When will the case be registered under the SC ST Act?

During the hearing in the High Court, the defense lawyer argued that this crime took place inside the complainant’s house. This is not a public place and common people did not see this incident. The lawyer said that due to this, no crime is made out in this case under SC/ST Act. The petitioner’s lawyer said that a case is made out under SC ST Act only when a person is deliberately insulted in public. At the same time, the government lawyer objected to this claim. However, the lawyer said that this incident cannot be denied, all this happened inside the house of the complainant.

What did the court say?

After hearing the arguments on the case, the Allahabad High Court found that the statement of the complainant and the FIR show that no outsider was present at the place where the incident took place. After this, the court gave its order and said that under section 3(1)(R) of the SC-ST Act, it is necessary that the crime should be committed in a public place. The Allahabad High Court, while dismissing the case, said that if the crime has happened in front of common people, then the provisions of the SC-ST Act will apply, but this did not happen in the present case.