File photo of the Supreme Court of India

NEW DELHI: Expressing concern over rampant misuse of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, the Supreme Court introduced the provision of anticipatory bail on Tuesday while also directing that there would be no automatic arrest on any complaint filed under the law and a preliminary inquiry must be conducted by police within seven days before taking any action.

A bench of Justices A K Goel and U U Lalit introduced the provision of anticipatory bail despite Section 18 of the act denying pre-arrest bail. Such a protective provision was required to safeguard the interest and dignity of innocents and prevent the misuse of the act as an instrument to blackmail or wreak personal vengeance, the bench said.

Can't remain a bystander or a spectator if rights violated: SC

It further said working of the SC/ST Act "should not result in perpetuating casteism which can have an adverse impact on the integration of society and constitutional values". "In view of the acknowledged abuse of law of arrest in cases under the Act, arrest of a public servant can only be after approval of the appointing authority and of a non-public servant after approval by the SSP, which may be granted in appropriate cases if considered necessary for reasons recorded. Such reasons must be scrutinised by the magistrate for permitting further detention. To avoid false implication of an innocent, a preliminary inquiry may be conducted by the DSP concerned to find out whether the allegations make out a case under the act and that the allegations are not frivolous or motivated," the bench said.

It added that the judiciary could not remain a mute spectator when the law was being misused to frame innocents in criminal cases and the court had to intervene for the protection of people's liberty as presumption of innocence was a human right. It noted that the law was framed by Parliament for the protection of historically underprivileged sections of society but now it was being misused.

"This court is not expected to adopt a passive or negative role and remain a bystander or a spectator if violation of rights is observed. It is necessary to fashion new tools and strategies so as to check injustice and violation of fundamental rights. No procedural technicality can stand in the way of enforcement of fundamental rights. There are innumerable decisions of this court where this approach has been adopted and directions issued with a view to enforce fundamental rights which may sometimes be perceived as legislative in nature. Such directions can certainly be issued and continued till an appropriate legislation is enacted," the bench said.

