SC amends its 2018 verdict on SC/ST Act on Centre's plea - Pragnya IAS Academy - News Analysis.

SC amends its 2018 verdict on SC/ST Act on Centre's plea.

A three-judge bench today set aside the order and observed that the apex court should not have ventured to frame guidelines as it comes within the domain of legislatures.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday quashed its own verdict which introduced measures like prior inquiry before the arrest of an accused under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Act), 1989.
A three-judge bench today set aside the order and observed that the apex court should not have ventured to frame guidelines as it comes within the domain of legislatures. "SC/ST have been outcasts for centuries, and untouchability has not vanished yet. They still remain 'Harijan', a bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra said today."
The court said that people belonging to SC /ST communities continue to be abused and discriminated and be socially outcast. It justified the protective Act saying that the abuse of the Act cannot be a ground to dilute its provisions.
The apex court recalled directions which mandated prior sanction for the arrest of public servants and private persons. The court also did away with the requirement of preliminary inquiry before registering FIR. Citing social discrimination faced by the backward classes, the court pointed out that Article 15 carves out special provisions.
The cloud of doubt on SC/ST was termed as 'human failings' by the court.
The Centre had filed a review petition in the court and pressed for the restoration of the stringent provisions. It had asked the court to review its 2018 order that diluted the provisions of SC/ST Act, calling it 'against the spirit of the Constitution'.
A bench of Justices Arun Mishra, MR Shah and BR Gavai had on September 18 reserved its verdict saying the misuse of the law did not mean that it should be diluted.
In March 2018, the Supreme Court had set in place guidelines to prevent the misuse of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocity) Act in which immediate arrest on complaints filed under the act was stopped. The judgment had led to a political uproar with many Dalit outfits targeting the Modi government alleging it did not defend the rights of the SC/ST communities in the Supreme Court. (Source: The Hindu)


The above Article can also be read using the link below:

SC amends its 2018 verdict on SC/ST Act on Centre's plea.

Won’t allow arrest of innocents even if govt makes law: Supreme Court on SC/ST Act ruling - Pragnya IAS Academy - News Analysis

Won’t allow arrest of innocents even if govt makes law: Supreme Court on SC/ST Act ruling.

HIGHLIGHTS
• Enforcement of law has to be fair and just and cardinality of Article 21 rights cannot be denied even by Parliament: SC bench.
• 'If an innocent person can be arrested or put behind bars, then we are not living in a civilised society'.

Toughening its stand against a review of its ruling diluting the arrest clause in the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, the Supreme Court on Wednesday said it would not allow arrest of an innocent merely on a complaint even if Parliament made a law.
"Right to life and liberty must be read into every provision that prescribes arrest of a person. That is the mandate for the Supreme Court and that was the approach followed by us while delivering the (March 20) judgment. Enforcement of law has to be fair and just and cardinality of Article 21 rights cannot be denied even by Parliament," a bench of Justices Adarsh Goel and U U Lalit said.
The court's remarks are significant in the light of reports that the government is preparing to bring an ordinance in case the SC does not restore the mandatory arrest provision in a case registered under the Act - an indication that it may take a dim view of its order being overturned either by an ordinance or through a legislative device like placing the law under the 9th schedule.
Attorney general KK Venugopal, while seeking a review of the order, told the bench that plenary power given to the SC under Article 142 of the Constitution was meant to ensure due process of law, and not to overturn law. "Powers of the Supreme Court cannot be construed to mean that the court can supplant provisions of law. Article 142 powers, even in its widest amplitude, cannot be used to substitute law or to be exercised contrary to existing provisions of law," he said, faulting the judgment as an attempt to substitute Parliament's intent, as reflected in the SC/ST Act, with the SC's view.
The judgment introduced the anticipatory bail provision, absent in the SC/ST Act. It also said no arrest could be made without a senior police officer carrying out a preliminary inquiry to establish the veracity of a complaint alleging that a derogatory reference was made against a person belonging to the SC or ST community.
Under the original law, a mere complaint of a derogatory reference, a cognisable offence under the Act, was enough for the accused to be arrested. The SC also introduced prior sanction from appointing authority, in case of a public servant, and from the senior superintendent of police, in case of a commoner, for arrests under the Act.
The bench said on Wednesday, "The Centre cannot make any grievance against the fair procedure that we have provided for effecting arrest of a person under the SC/ST Act. We (the SC) will not allow arrest of an innocent even if Parliament makes such a law. That is the mandate for the Supreme Court. If an innocent person can be arrested or put behind bars, then we are not living in a civilised society."
Realising the difficult nature of the task, Venugopal and additional solicitor general Tushar Mehta readily accepted the bench’s offer for a detailed hearing in July when all parties would get adequate time to put forth their views on the judgment.
The SC’s decision to dilute the arrest provision led to protests in several parts of the country by Dalit groups on April 2 in which nine persons died. This forced the Centre to urgently move a petition seeking review of the judgment. (Source: The Times of India)


The above Article can also be read using the link below:

Won’t allow arrest of innocents even if govt makes law: Supreme Court on SC/ST Act ruling.

SC/ST Act may go to Schedule IX of Constitution - Pragnya IAS Academy - News Analysis

SC/ST Act may go to Schedule IX of Constitution.

The “dilution” triggered massive protests by various Dalit and political outfits, during which nearly a dozen people were killed.

The government is planning to bring an ordinance to overturn the Supreme Court verdict putting safeguards on arrests under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and subsequently introduce a bill to insulate it from further judicial scrutiny.

The government is likely to introduce the bill in monsoon session of Parliament to incorporate the legislation in the Ninth Schedule of the Constitution, laws under which cannot be challenged in courts.
Through the ordinance, the government will reintroduce provisions of the act which it feels were diluted by the Supreme Court verdict in March this year.
The “dilution” triggered massive protests by various Dalit and political outfits, during which nearly a dozen people were killed.
‘Interim arrangement’
“While the bill is a permanent arrangement to ensure that the SC/ST Act’s provisions are not diluted again, the ordinance is an interim arrangement to overturn the ruling,” a senior government functionary explained.
The proposed ordinance would make it clear that notwithstanding any judgement or any other law in force, the provisions of the act shall remain valid.
“Once promulgated, this would mean the ordinance would overturn the SC order,” a Law Ministry official said.
“The next hearing is on May 16 and much would depend on that,” said a senior official in the Social Justice and Empowerment Ministry.
Referring to the proposed bill, an official said, “Once included in the Ninth Schedule, the legislation gets protection under Article 31-B (validation of certain Acts and Regulations) and is not subject to judicial scrutiny.”
Recently, the Supreme Court refused to stay its March 20 order diluting certain provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
Review petition by centre
While hearing observations by attorney general K K Venugopal on a review petition filed by the Centre, the apex court had said that it was not against the Act but the innocent should not be punished.
Dalit groups had organised protests across the country on April 2 against the “dilution” of the act through the Supreme Court’s March 20 verdict.
The protests had turned violent at several places which left nearly a dozen people killed. Opposition parties also accused the government of failing to protect Dalit rights.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi had last month asserted that his government would not let any dilution in the law aimed at preventing atrocities against SCs and STs.
In its March 20 order, the apex court had laid down new guidelines for police officers on how to ensure that innocent people, especially public officials, are protected from false complaints under the act. (Source: The Hindu)


The above Article can also be read using the link below:

SC/ST Act may go to Schedule IX of Constitution.