Merely taking caste name without intention to insult will not constitute offence under SC/ST Act: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court recently held that merely taking the caste name of a person belonging to a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, without any intention to insult or humiliate them, would not become an offence under the Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 (SC/ST Act) [Shailesh Kumar V v State]..Single-judge Justice M Nagaprasanna went through various judgments on the subject and observed that, "If the law laid down by the Apex Court, the co-ordinate Bench of this Court and even that of the High Court of Orissa is juxtaposed what would unmistakably emerge is, mere taking the name of the caste of the victim would not make it an offence, unless it is with an intention to insult the person belonging to the said caste.".The observation was made in an order partially allowing a plea moved by one Shailesh Kumar who was accused in a first information report (FIR) registered in 2020.The FIR was lodged on the basis of a complaint filed by a woman.As per the same, the complainant's son and Kumar had played a cricket match along with several others. After her son's team lost, some altercations took place between his team and Kumar. The complainant alleged that her son was taken away and beaten. Consequently, the police registered the FIR against Kumar and another person for allegedly committing offences punishable under the Indian Penal Code (IPC).The investigation later revealed that certain abuses in filthy language were also made by Kumar and others against the son of the complainant and therefore, offences punishable under the SC/ST Act were then added to the case..In January 2021, the trial court took cognizance of the offences alleged in the charge-sheet under the IPC and SC/ST Act. That order came to be challenged before the High Court.Counsel for Kumar submitted that there was no abuses hurled and that all the allegations sprang up because of a game of cricket that had gone wrong the previous day. It was further argued that merely hurling abuses without any intention to insult or make casteist remarks would not constitute an offence under the SC/ST Act..Upon going through the chargesheet, Justice Nagaprasanna noted that it only said that while hurling of abuses at each other at the end of a cricket match, the name of the caste of the son of the complainant was taken. "Except this statement, there is no whisper about the petitioner having hurled abuse taking the name of the caste of the complainant intentionally to insult or humiliate by making castiest remarks," the judge said in his order..Further, referring to Sections 3(1)(r) & (s) of the SC/ST Act, the Court noted that the soul of the provision is intention. Therefore, the insult should be intentional and the intimidation should be with intent to humiliate a member of the Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe.The same being conspicuously absent in the case at hand, permitting further proceedings to continue with respect to the offences under the Act would become an abuse of the process of law, the Court opined..With regard to the offences under the IPC, the Court said that there was undoubtedly material right from the complaint till the charge sheet for offences punishable under the same."There is ample evidence in the statements and the narration in the summary of the charge-sheet albeit prima facie to bring home those offences. It is for the petitioner to come out clean in the offences under the IPC. Since the offences are grave in nature, there can be no interference insofar as offences under the IPC are concerned,” the Court ordered..Advocate Jaysham Jayasimha Rao represented the petitioner while advocate KP Yashodha represented the respondent..[Read Order]