Caste-based abuse in public view and caste not element of crime: Court
Prayagraj: Giving a big relief in a case of misuse of SC ST Act, Allahabad High Court has cancelled the entire criminal proceedings and summons order. The court said that the date, time, place, words and even public view of casteist abuse is not mentioned in the FIR, the threat of kidnapping the daughter if she does not vote is also baseless, whereas the girl herself is a 24 year old graduate and has married her lover of her own free will. The main charge was of kidnapping, which was dropped by the investigating officer himself, then filing a charge sheet against the same accused on the same material is arbitrary. Justice Tej Pratap Tiwari gave this decision on the appeal of Satya Prakash. Advocates Ajay Kumar Shukla and Gaurav Tiwari argued on behalf of the appellant.
On July 17, 2025, Mrs. Rajo Devi filed a written complaint alleging that the appellant, whose wife is the president of the village self-help group and whose daughter-in-law is a member of the same group, came to her house regarding an election dispute at the ration shop dealership, abused her with casteist slurs, and threatened to have her daughter taken away from her home if she did not vote for him. That same day, at 10 a.m., she went to the Anganwadi center and upon returning, found her unmarried daughter missing. An FIR was registered at the Kyoladiya police station in Bareilly.
It was argued that the FIR was the result of an election rivalry. The daughter was an adult, went off on her own will, and married Bhagwan Das, without mentioning the appellant’s name anywhere. Mobile conversations and WhatsApp videos in the case diary prove a love affair. The investigating officer acquitted others based on this evidence and dropped Section 87, yet arbitrarily filed a chargesheet against the appellant. Sections of the SC/ST Act lack the element of public viewing. The special judge took cognizance mechanically without considering the facts. The public prosecutor argued that the appellant was named, that he, along with co-accused, had abducted the daughter, and used casteist slurs. The plaintiff and her husband supported this, making the cognizance justified. The court stated that the essence of the FIR was kidnapping, which failed to be investigated. The remaining threats were made out of an election rivalry, and pursuing a case against him would be an abuse of justice.
