Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

8. Section 3 enlists various actions as offence of atrocities and provides punishment for these. Though the FIR in question does not specify anyone of the actions covered by various sub-sections, it could at best be assumed that the allegations may proximate to Sub-sections (1)(x) and (1)(xi) of the Act. First sub-section makes it an offence, if a non-SC/ST person intentially insults or intimidates with the intent to humiliate a member of SC/ST in any place within 'public view', punishable with minimum six months imprisonment which may extend to five years with fine. Similarly, Sub-section (xi) makes it an offence if a non-SC/ST person assaults or uses force to any woman belonging to SC/St with intent to dishonour or outrage her modesty. Relevant sub-sections read thus:-

9. A plain reading of the two sub-sections brings out the following ingredients which are common to these in the present context:-

(a) A person making the alleged derogatory utterance must know that the person whom he was intentionally insulting, intimating with intent to humiliate him was a member of SC/ST.
(b) Such intentional insult, intimation or humiliation must be directed against and made to a member of SC/ST and for being member of SC/ST.
(C) The utterance must be made at any place within "public view".

10. In the present case, we are concerned with the first two ingredients and it emerges there from that a case would fall under the first sub-section only when the person making the derogatory utterance knows that the person whom he was intentionally insulting or intimidating or humiliating in the name of the caste was a member of SC or ST. If he had no knowledge of his caste status, the offence under Sub-section (1)(x) would not be constituted. Similarly if his utterance was not directed against a member of SC/ST in contradistinction to a group of members of SC/ST or the community as a whole, it would not again make out an offence under Sub-section (1)(x). The word "a member" occurring in the provision assumes crucial importance in this context and leaves no scope for doubt that it must be directed against the individual member and not against a group of members or the crowd or the public in general though these may comprise of SC/ST. If it is made in generalised terms against all and sundry and is not individual specific in the name of caste, it would not make out an offence under the first sub-section, the rationale being that intensional insult, intimidation and humiliation made in the name of case was liable to be caused to a person and in this case to an individual member of SC/ST and not to a group of members or public in general.