Rajasthan HC clears accused of charges under SC/ST Act in 2011 ‘casteist slurs’ case

The Rajasthan high court on Tuesday dismissed charges under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, against four individuals accused of using derogatory language toward public officials during an encroachment inspection in Jaisalmer.
Justice Birendra Kumar observed that the alleged terms used — ‘bhangi’, ‘neech’, ‘bhikhari’ and ‘mangani’ — were not casteist slurs and therefore did not meet the criteria for an offence under the SC/ST Act.
The issue dates to a January 2011 incident when officials, led by case informant Harish Chandra, visited a site to assess possible encroachment on public land. During the inspection, the appellants, led by Achal Singh, allegedly obstructed the officials and verbally abused them.
A criminal case was subsequently registered against the petitioners under sections 353 (criminal force to deter a public servant from duty), 332 (causing hurt to deter public servant), and Section 3(1)(X) of the SC/ST Act, 1989. However, after initial investigation, the police filed a negative report, finding insufficient evidence for SC/ST Act charges. A protest petition was later filed, resulting in criminal charges, which the appellants challenged.
The counsel for the appellants, Leela Dhar Khatri, argued that the alleged statements were unassociated with any caste and that the appellants lacked knowledge of the officials’ caste backgrounds. He asserted that the altercation stemmed not from caste-based discrimination but from the appellants’ objections to the accuracy of the measurements conducted by the officials.
Justice Kumar, referring to similar cases, including the Supreme Court’s recent decision, stated, “The words used were not caste names, nor is there any allegation that the petitioners were known to the caste of the public servants, who had gone to remove the encroachments. Moreover, it is crystal clear on bare perusal of allegation that the petitioners were not intending to humiliate the accused persons for the reason that they were members of Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribes rather act of the petitioners was in protest against the action of measurements being wrongly done by the public servants.”
The court highlighted that all witnesses to the incident were part of the official team, with no independent witnesses present to confirm a public view of the alleged abuses. Given these findings, the court concluded that the SC/ST Act charges were not applicable, as the intent to humiliate based on caste was absent. However, the court upheld the charges under IPC Sections 353 and 332.