“Mere non-cancellation of the caste certificate by the authority to a person who has converted into Christianity cannot instil the protection granted under the Protective Legislation” - HC
Terming the complaint filed under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 2015, a ‘misuse of protective legislation’, recently, the Andhra Pradesh High Court quashed proceedings under the said Act, holding that a person who has converted to Christianity and served as a Pastor for over a decade, cannot seek protection under the 2015 Act, as it applies only to Scheduled Caste members professing Hinduism.
Brief Facts:
The matter arose from a complaint filed by Respondent No. 2 against the petitioner under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 2015, and Sections 341, 506, and 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. In the complaint, Respondent No. 2, who is a Pastor conducting Sunday prayers in Pittalavanipalem Village, alleged that he was subjected to multiple assaults by the petitioner, received repeated life threats to himself and his family, and was also abused in the name of caste. Consequently, a case was registered against the petitioner. After the completion of the investigation, a charge sheet was filed. Aggrieved by this, the petitioner approached the High Court seeking quashing of the charges against him.
Contentions of the Petitioner:
The petitioners submitted that the very registration of the FIR alleging offences under the SC&ST Act is bad in law. They contended that the complainant is working as a Pastor and has converted to Christianity; and therefore, he cannot claim to be a member of the Scheduled Caste community, as the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order expressly states that no person who professes a religion other than Hinduism shall be deemed to be a member of a Scheduled Caste.
Contentions of the Respondent:
The respondent on the other hand submitted that the police conducted a thorough investigation and filed the charge sheet after recording the statements of more than ten witnesses. It was further argued that Respondent No. 2 cannot be denied protection under the SC&ST Act, as the Tahsildar of Pittalavanipalem Mandal (Witness No. 12) had confirmed that Respondent No. 2 belongs to the Hindu-Madiga community. The respondent also contended that Respondent No. 2 possesses a valid caste certificate issued by the Tahsildar.
Observations of the Court:
Justice Harinath. N observed that “Filing of charge sheet inspite of the categorical statements of the listed witnesses specifically stating that the 2nd respondent is working as a Pastor for the last 10 years, the police could not have laid a charge sheet charging the petitioners for alleged offence under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va), SC ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Similarly, except for the listed witness Nos.1 and 3 no other witness speak about the altercation involving 30 people. Even the charge sheet does not state that 30 people had participated in the altercation.”
While addressing the core issue, as to whether Respondent No. 2, having served as a Pastor for the last ten years as on the date of the complaint, could claim Scheduled Caste status after converting to Christianity, the Court held that, under Section 3 of the SC&ST Act, only a member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe can invoke the provisions of the Act.
The Court found that Respondent No. 2 had misused the protective legislation, which was specifically enacted to prevent atrocities against members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. It emphasized that Respondent No. 2 had voluntarily converted to Christianity and had been working as a Pastor for over a decade. Therefore, he was not entitled to claim the benefits of the Act, and the registration of crime under the provisions of SC/ ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act is illegal.
While rejecting the respondent's reliance on the caste certificate, the Court clarified that issues relating to the validity of such certificates fall within the purview of Section 5 of the Andhra Pradesh (Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes) Regulation of Issue of Community Certificates Act, 1993. It further observed that mere non-cancellation of the caste certificate by the competent authority does not entitle a converted Christian to invoke the protective provisions of the Act.
The decision of the Court:
Allowing the criminal petition, the High Court held that a false complaint had been filed and that no purpose would be served by subjecting the petitioners to the rigours of trial. Consequently, the proceedings were quashed.
Case Title: Akkala Rami Reddy Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh
Case No: Criminal Petition No.7114 of 2022
Coram: Hon’ble Justice Harinath. N
Advocate for Petitioner: Adv. J.V.Phaniduth
Advocate for Respondent: Adv. Satheesh Kumar Eerla
Picture Source :
