Constitutional Notification as Prerequisite for SC/ST Act Offences

Introduction

This case arises from Writ Petition (Cr.) No. 1146 of 2023, heard by the Jharkhand High Court on April 8, 2025. The petitioner, Sunil Kumar, a 57-year-old settlement officer, challenged the registration of FIR No. 07/2023 at Dumka Sadar SC/ST Police Station. The FIR alleged that, in refusing and insulting a female applicant under the Right to Information Act, the petitioner used caste-based insults (“insane Adivasis”) and pushed her out—offences under IPC Sections 341, 323, 504, 506, 354 and Sections 3(1)(r) & (s) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The core issue is whether the informant’s caste designation (“Adivasi”) qualifies her as a “Scheduled Tribe” under the Act and Constitution, and whether the offences are made out.

Summary of the Judgment

The Court held that “Scheduled Castes” and “Scheduled Tribes” for the Act must correspond to castes or tribes specified by Presidential notification under Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution.
“Adivasi” is not listed in the Jharkhand Schedule to the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950; thus the informant is neither a Scheduled Caste nor a Scheduled Tribe for legal purposes.
Consequently, offences under Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST Act are not made out. Other IPC offences (341, 323, 504, 506, 354) likewise fail on their elements.
The FIR was quashed as an abuse of process, and the writ petition was allowed.

Analysis

Precedents Cited

The Court referred to:

Raju Pandurang Mahale v. State Of Maharashtra, (2004) 4 SCC 371 – defining ingredients of IPC Section 354 (outraging modesty).
Naresh Aneja @ Naresh Kumar Aneja v. U.P., 2025 INSC 19 – reaffirming the intent requirement under Section 354 IPC.

These decisions clarify that each offence under IPC requires strict proof of its ingredients, which were absent here.

Legal Reasoning

Definition of SC/ST in the Act: Section 2(c) of the SC/ST Act invokes Articles 366(24) and (25), tying “Scheduled Castes/Tribes” to Articles 341 and 342 notifications.
Constitutional Notifications: Article 341 empowers the President, after State consultation, to notify castes as Scheduled Castes. Article 342 does likewise for Scheduled Tribes. These lists are sacrosanct unless amended by Parliament.
Absence of “Adivasi”: The Jharkhand List (Part XXII of the 1950 Order) does not include “Adivasi.” Thus “Adivasi” is not a constitutionally recognized Scheduled Tribe or Caste.
Statutory Offences Under SC/ST Act: Sections 3(1)(r) & (s) penalize insults or abuses of a person as a member of a Scheduled Caste/Tribe. Without membership, these offences collapse.
IPC Offences:
- Section 354 IPC: No evidence of criminal force intended to outrage modesty.
- Section 341 IPC: No obstruction preventing lawful movement.
- Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC: Either non-cognizable or lacking ingredients (no actual bodily harm, no clear criminal intimidation or insult).
Abuse of Process: Proceeding against a public servant on unfounded charges was held abusive, warranting quashing of the FIR.

Impact

This judgment reinforces that:

Courts will strictly enforce the constitutional lists for SC/ST Act applicability—informal caste labels will not suffice.
Police and prosecutors must verify the notified status of victims before invoking the SC/ST Act, to prevent misuse.
Public servants may seek early quashing of frivolous FIRs that lack foundational legal elements.

Complex Concepts Simplified

Constitutional Notification: A list published by the President, defining which communities are “Scheduled Castes” or “Scheduled Tribes.” Only communities on that list enjoy Act protections.
SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act: A special law protecting members of Scheduled Castes/Tribes from targeted insult, intimidation or violence.
Ingredients of an Offence: The specific facts or elements that must be proved for a crime—e.g., to outrage a woman’s modesty (Section 354), you need intent or knowledge that your act would do so.
Quashing an FIR: Exercising writ jurisdiction to declare a police report void when no legal offence exists or proceeding would abuse the court’s process.

Conclusion

The Jharkhand High Court’s decision in Sunil Kumar v. State of Jharkhand establishes an important precedent: offences under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act require that the victim be a constitutionally notified member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe. Informal or non-specified designations like “Adivasi” do not trigger the Act’s protections. This ruling will guide law enforcement and lower courts to strictly confirm the notified status of complainants and curb misuse of special atrocity provisions.