Wednesday, March 18


Chennai: Provisions of the SC/ST Act are more misused than used for legitimate and genuine instances, the Madras high court has said. “It is high time for the state SC/ST Commission to be abreast of the law propounded by the courts before entertaining complaints so that the innocent common man is not unnecessarily dragged to go through the rigours of the penal consequences attached to the provisions,” the court added.Justice M Dhandapani made the observations while quashing a complaint entertained by the commission, lodged by an advocate against three police officers, including Varun Kumar IPS, currently DIG, CB-CID, Chennai. “It is to be pointed out that it is the duty of the SC/ST Commission to separate wheat from chaff before embarking upon investigating a complaint, as such acts would put the alleged offenders in peril, when the act is visited with penal consequences,” Justice Dhandapani said.The issue pertains to a complaint lodged by advocate P Thamizhselvan against Varun Kumar, Yasmin, assistant commissioner of police, CCB, Vepery, and V Kavitha, special sub-inspector, the Jambunathapura police.The court passed the order on a plea moved by the police officers challenging the decision of the commission to entertain the complaint made by the lawyer. Thamizhselvan had a property dispute with one Kannan.It was his complaint that when he approached the petitioners to register a complaint against Kannan, the officers refused to entertain the complaint. Aggrieved, the lawyer lodged a complaint before the State Human Rights Commission (SHRC) and the State SC/ST Commission, alleging that the officers humiliated him by calling him by his caste name.Allowing the plea moved by the police officers, the court said: “In the present case, to attract the ingredients codified in Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST Act, the act should have been perpetrated in public view. A perusal of the complaint before the commission reveals that the incident is alleged to have taken place behind the four walls of the office of the petitioners.”



Source link

Share.
Leave A Reply

Exit mobile version