Discharge Petition in SC/ST Act Cases

Source: High Court of Kerala 

Why in News? 

Justice A. Badharudeen of the High Court of Kerala in the case of Reshmi Saseendran v. State of Kerala and Another (2026) held that while considering a discharge petition, the statement of the aggrieved person alone would prima facie disclose the ingredients for offences under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, and dismissed the criminal appeal challenging the rejection of the discharge petition. 

What was the Background of Reshmi Saseendran v. State of Kerala and Another (2026) Case? 

• The case arose from an incident that occurred at 4:00 p.m. on March 31, 2023, during a meeting held in an open space in front of the Bharat Services Facility Management Office. 
• The office was situated on the ground floor of the Trans Asia Cyber Park building near Infopark Phase-2, Padathikkara, Puthencruze Village. 
• The allegation was that the accused humiliated the defacto complainant by calling her by her caste name in public view. 
• The incident allegedly took place in the presence of cleaning staff of Bharath Services Facility Management Office. 
• An FIR was filed on May 9, 2023 at Infopark Police Station, Ernakulam City. 
• The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Thrikkara submitted the Final Report on October 12, 2023. 
• The accused was charged with offences punishable under Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 
• The case was registered as SC No. 1912/2023 before the Special Court for trial of offences under the SC/ST (PoA) Act, 1989. 
• The appellant/accused filed a discharge petition dated May 14, 2025, numbered as Crl. M.P. 901/2025. 
• The Special Court dismissed the discharge petition on November 10, 2025, finding prima facie case against the accused. 
• The accused then filed Criminal Appeal No. 2319 of 2025 before the Kerala High Court challenging the order. 
• The appeal came up for admission on January 13, 2026.

What were the Court's Observations? 

• The Court noted that the appellant's counsel primarily relied on the statements of the defacto complainant and witness No. 2, arguing that witness No. 2's statement did not contain overt acts to fasten criminal culpability on the appellant. 
• The Court examined the statement of the defacto complainant and found specific allegations that at about 4:00 p.m. on March 31, 2023, the accused abused her by calling her caste name in the presence of cleaning staff. 
• The Court outlined the essential ingredients to constitute offences under Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST (PoA) Act, 1989. 
• For an offence under Section 3(1)(r), there must be intentional insult or intimidation by a non-member of the Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe against a member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe community, with intention to humiliate such member within public view. 
• The Court held that abusing any member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe community by caste name within public view by a non-member would attract offence under Section 3(1)(r). 
• The Court found that the statement of the defacto complainant disclosed the ingredients to attract offences under Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s). 
• The Court emphasized that the evidence of a solitary wholly reliable witness would suffice the purpose. 
• The Court held that the mere statement of the aggrieved person would prima facie disclose the ingredients for the offences charged. 
• The Court clarified that mere suspicion would not suffice the requirement for framing charges. 
• Applying these principles, the Court found that the impugned order did not require any interference and dismissed the criminal appeal. 

What ST/SC (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989? 

About the SC/ST Act: 

• SC/ST Act 1989 is an Act of Parliament enacted to prohibit discrimination against SC & ST communities' members and prevent atrocities against them. 
• The Act was passed in Parliament of India on 11th September 1989 and notified on 30 January 1990. 
• The Act is also a recognition of the depressing reality that despite undertaking several measures, the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes continue to be subjected to various atrocities at the hands of upper castes. 
• The Act has been enacted keeping in view the express constitutional safeguards enumerated in Articles 15, 17 and 21 of the Constitution of India, 1950 (COI), with a twin-fold objective of protecting the members of these vulnerable communities as well as to provide relief and rehabilitation to the victims of caste-based atrocities. 

SC/ST (Amendment) Act, 2015: 

• This Act was amended in the year 2015 for the purpose of making the act more stringent with the following provisions: 
  • Recognition was given to more instances of atrocities as crimes against SCs and STs. 
  • It added several new offences in Section 3 and renumbered the entire section since the recognized crime almost doubled. 
  • The Act added Chapter IVA Section 15A (the rights of victims and witnesses), and defined dereliction of duty by officials and accountability mechanisms more precisely. 
  • It provided for the establishment of exclusive special courts and special public prosecutors. 
  • In the context of public servants at all levels this Act defined the term willful negligence. 

SC/ST (Amendment) Act, 2018: 

• In the case of Prithvi Raj Chauhan v. Union of India (2020), the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of Parliament’s 2018 Amendment to the Prevention of Atrocities Act. The Salient features of this Amendment Act are as follows: 
  • It added Section 18A to the original Act. 
  • It delineates specific crimes against Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes as atrocities and describes strategies and prescribes punishments to counter these acts. 
  • It identifies what acts constitute “atrocities” and all offences listed in the Act are cognizable. The police can arrest the offender without a warrant and start an investigation into the case without taking any orders from the court. 
  • The Act calls upon all the states to convert an existing sessions court in each district into a Special Court to try cases registered under it and provides for the appointment of Public Prosecutors/Special Public Prosecutors for conducting cases in special courts. 
  • It creates provisions for states to declare areas with high levels of caste violence to be “atrocity-prone” and to appoint qualified officers to monitor and maintain law and order. 
  • It provides for the punishment for willful neglect of duties by non-SC/ST public servants. 
  • It is implemented by the State Governments and Union Territory Administrations, which are provided due central assistance. 

Section 3(1)(r) of the SC/ST Act: 

• Section 3 of this Act deals with punishments for offences atrocities. 
• Section 3(1)(r) states that whoever, not being a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe intentionally insults or intimidates with intent to humiliate a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe in any place within public view shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than six months but which may extend to five years and with fine.

Section 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST Act: 

• This provision makes it an offence when a person who is not a member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe abuses any member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe by caste name in any place within public view.