Q. With reference to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989, consider the following statements:
1. Any kind of insult made to persons belonging to SC or ST will be an offence under the act.
2. The Act does not generally allow the grant of anticipatory bail to an accused.
3. Under the act, there is no requirement for a preliminary inquiry before filing an FIR.
How many statements given above are correct?
Exp) Option b is the correct answer
Statement 1 is incorrect. All insults or intimidations to persons belonging to Dalit or tribal communities will not be an offence under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, the Supreme Court said in a judgment. An insult or intimidation to a person will be an offence under the Act only when such insult or intimidation is on account of victim belonging to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe. The court said the insult should be specifically intended to humiliate the victim for his caste.
Statement 2 is correct. The 2018 amendments in the SC ST Act provided that there would be no provision of anticipatory bail. The Supreme Court had earlier removed the restrictions on granting anticipatory bail. The government reversed the judgement through an amendment in SC/ST act. However, the Supreme Court made an exception and said courts could still grant pre-arrest bail in cases where there was no prima facie evidence warranting arrest. ‘Bail’ is “the release of a person from legal custody. An ordinary bail is granted to a person who is under arrest. While in anticipatory bail, a person is directed to be released on bail even before the arrest is made.
Statement 3 is correct. Under the act there is no requirement for a preliminary inquiry before filing an FIR. A new section – 18A was introduced through amendment in SC/ST act in 2018, which laid down that there was no requirement for a preliminary inquiry before filing an FIR.
