NOT. ambedkar alone

 

DECCAN  INQUIRER

BI-WEEKLY E NEWS  PAPER  

EDITOR:  NAGARAJA.M.R ....VOL.21  .. ISSUE...49…....…19/06/2025

Editorial  -  NOT  ambedkar  alone

An Appeal to Honourable Chief Justice of India

     Our Constitution of India  was  drafted , prepared , reviewed  by a team of legal experts including  B R Ambedkar.

      

Whenever honouring  authors of our constitution  all team members must be equally honoured. Being a gentleman B R Ambedkar  himself  acknowledged  the contributions of his team members in preparing Constitution.

However Politicians  and dalit leaders with an eye on huge dalit vote bank are showing disrespect to  other team members and propagating fake narrative Ambedkar alone framed our Constitution.

The same people for vote banks  are indiscriminately erecting  statues of ambedkar in many places. Now  they are violently forcing to install statue of ambedkar in Madhya Pradesh High Court Gwalior.

Hereby , we request your honourable self , 

To take action against  dalit goondas , rowdies  who physically assaulted advocate in below video  and  to take action against  dalit  goondas , rowdies mentioned in articles  below.  See video :

https://x.com/Satwant_Rana_/status/1934056922086523254?t=H03CFZDrOBpH718SbcQ1bQ&s=19 

To  frame legal parameters  for erecting statues in public places and to declare public holidays honouring individuals.

There are  Gandhi,  subhash chandra bose , bhagath singh , lala Lajpat rai , etc who sacrificed more for india’s  freedom struggle. Still  statues of them are few , public holidays honouring them  few. Erect their statues also in equal number to ambedkar  statues , declare public holidays honouring  them.

If  goverment or anybody wants to honour our constitutional framers  erect statues of  all 8 members including ambedkar but  not ambedkar  alone.

Now politicians and dalit leaders are demanding Installtion of ambedkar statue in madhya pradesh high court , gwalior to honour constitution architect. We request you to order installation of statues of all 8 members of constitution drafting committee at gwalior high court.

Thanking you

Nagaraja M R

Editor  DECCAN INQUIRER

B N  Rau  - Architect  of  Constitution of India

Ambedkar in his concluding speech in constituent assembly on 25 November 1949 stated that:

The credit that is given to me does not really belong to me. It belongs partly to Sir B.N. Rau the Constitutional Advisor to the Constituent Assembly who prepared a rough draft of the Constitution for the consideration of the Drafting Committee.

B. N. Rau was appointed as the constitutional adviser to the Constituent Assembly in formulating the Indian Constitution in 1946.[13]

As part of his research in drafting the Constitution of India, in 1946, Rau traveled to the US, Canada, Ireland, and the United Kingdom, where he had personal consultations with judges, scholars, and authorities on constitutional law.[15] Amongst others, he met Justice Felix Frankfurter of the American Supreme Court, who famously advised him against the inclusion of a clause for 'due process' in the Indian Constitution as it would impose an 'undue burden' on the judiciary.[16]

The Constituent Assembly's resolution set up the Drafting Committee on 29 August 1947, under the chairmanship of B. R. Ambedkar, declared that it was being set up to "Scrutinise the Draft of the text of the Constitution prepared by the Constitutional Adviser, give into effect the decisions taken already in the Assembly and include all matters ancillary thereto or which have to be provided in such a Constitution, and to submit to the Assembly for consideration the text of the Draft Constitution as revised by the Committee." The draft prepared by the constitutional advisor was submitted in October 1947. Along with this draft, the proposals offered by the various other committees set up by the Constituent Assembly were considered. The first draft by the Drafting Committee was published in February 1948. The people of India were given eight months to discuss the draft and propose amendments. In the light of the public comments, criticisms, and suggestions, the Drafting Committee prepared a second draft, which was published in October 1948. The final draft of the Constitution was introduced by Ambedkar on 4 November 1948 (first reading). The second reading was clause by clause consideration and took over a year. After three drafts and three readings, the constitution was declared as passed on 26 November 1949. 

Ambedkar in his concluding speech in constituent assembly on 25 November 1949 stated that:

The credit that is given to me does not really belong to me. It belongs partly to Sir B.N. Rau the Constitutional Advisor to the Constituent Assembly who prepared a rough draft of the Constitution for the consideration of the Drafting Committee.

BN Rau: The forgotten architect of Indian Constitution

By  BISWARAJ PATNAIK

India became a democratic Republic on this day in 1950 after attaining independence from the British in 19 47. Democracy means ruling by the choice of the majority; republic is more meaningful: rule by ordinary people, not by hereditary monarchs, feudal lords or any other privileged class.

 A nation state is considered full-fledged and sovereign only when, apart from its geographical boundary and people living within it, it has its own Constitution based on which laws of the land are made and rules of conduct by public and more importantly the public servants are specified in terms of right and wrong and corresponding punishment for violation. Essentially, a Constitution is the ‘will’ of the state. It is a sociopolitical and legal document which is drafted by experts and debated and voted by a Constituent Assembly or a similar body.

The Indian Constitution was drafted by a core committee of seven experts headed by Dr BR Ambedkar. All were legal experts or administrative luminaries including Sir BN Rau,  KM Munshi, N Gopalaswamy Ayyangar, Alladi Krishnaswamy Ayyar, Syed Mohammad Saadullah, N Madhava Rau who was Diwan (Prime Minister) of Mysore and replaced Bl Mitter who had resigned due to ill health. 

NMR had vehemently opposed Hindi as the national language. The draft was debated, altered and finally approved by the Constituent Assembly after a couple of years.  DP Khaitan  was also inducted, but he died in 1948 to be replaced by TT Krishnamachari, who became a Minister for two times in the  Nehru Cabinet.

Ambedkar was chosen the head because he had already served in various sub-committees like the Advisory Committee, Fundamental Rights Sub-Committee and Minorities Sub-Committee of the Constitutional Assembly. 

He submitted a memorandum with very valid suggestions to the Fundamental Rights Sub-Committee. This memorandum was later published for wider circulation under the title ‘States and minorities, their rights and how to secure them in the Constitution of free India’. 

That is why the Congress party was convinced that legislation and solidification of freedom would not be easy without the services of Dr Ambedkar. Incidentally, the Congress had earlier opposed tooth and nail Ambedkar’s entry into the Constituent Assembly. In his letter of 30th June 1947, Dr Rajendra Prasad, President of the Constituent Assembly, had requested BG Kher, the then Prime Minister of Bombay, to elect Dr Ambedkar immediately.

The Constitution of India is the most voluminous in the world, consisting of 448 articles, 25 parts, 12 schedules, 5 appendices and over 98 amendments.

Mahatma Gandhi was not really sidelined from the constitution making exercise. He chose to keep away because he was keen that the Congress be dissolved before any critical state activity was undertaken. Gandhi also did not attend the gathering where Nehru made his first speech to the Constituent Assembly. Gandhi was a mass leader not a politician. The Constitution drafting required patience, negotiating skills and a flexibility to accommodate diverse opinions. Gandhi believed he was not really cut out to be part of such activity. 

The committee had other brilliant people from nearly all walks of life including some of those who opposed the Congress like Dr Syama Prasad Mookerjee. Nehru, Patel, Rajendra Prasad and Maulana Azad were very seriously involved in the Constitution making process. But Gandhi had made his desire clear which was duly given place by the expert team. The Mahatma’s focus on villages, agriculture, self-reliance, etc., were given high importance in the Constitution. So, Gandhi around this time remained busy touring across India trying to douse communal fires that were burning incessantly at most places.

The smartest card played by shrewd Nehru was putting Ambedkar at the top, thereby sending out a strong political message that the untouchables would not face discrimination ever. History shows this one act has done more for ‘dalit empowerment’ than any other step.

There is much talk about who really was the biggest brain behind making the Constitution as knowledgeable people believe Ambedkar couldn’t have been the guy. Oldies with wisdom, who knew the India of those days, have said univocally that BN Rau who was appointed as the adviser to the Constituent Assembly was the expert who did the most job and worked out the democratic framework of the Constitution. He singlehandedly prepared the initial draft by February 1948, to be debated, revised and finally adopted by the team on November 26, 1949. The Drafting Committee, under the chairmanship of Ambedkar, declared that the ‘Draft Constitution’ was being scrutinised thoroughly by adviser BN Rau for making it one of the world’s best Constitutions.

President of Constituent Assembly Rajendra Prasad, just before signing the Constitution on November 26, 1949, thanked Rau profusely for having “worked honorarily” assisting the assembly not only with his knowledge and erudition but enabling the other members to perform their duties with thorough prudence. Rau was not a member of the Constitutional Assembly but was the most important expert who did the primary thinking and writing. He has been religiously ignored by frontline politicians who never gave him his due space in history. Rau is the principal framer of the Indian Constitution; others only did the cosmetic jobs here and there. like they have forgotten VP Menon, Secretary of States, who drafted the ‘instrument of accession’ to force the 564 Princely States to merge with the Union of India, Rau is not remembered by the political bosses of today. Most of them do not even know who he is by name.

Sir Benegal Narsing Rau, an illustrious Kannada, born on February 26, 1887, lived till November 30, 1953. He served as an Indian Civil Service officer, a jurist, a diplomat and a statesman of great repute. He was also India’s Representative to the United Nations Security Council between 1950 and 1952. His brothers were equally illustrious: Benegal Rama Rau was Governor of the Reserve Bank of India and B Shiva Rao an eminent journalist-politician. One of the foremost Indian jurists of his time, Sir Rau, had also helped draft the Constitution of Burma in 1947. As India’s Representative at the UN Security Council, he served as president of the council and recommended armed assistance to South Korea. later, he became a member at the Korean War post ‘Armistice’ of the UN Command Military Armistice Commission (UNCMAC). A graduate of the Universities of Madras and Cambridge, Rau entered the ICS in 1910. After revising the entire Indian statutory code (1935-37), he was Knighted in 1938 and made judge of the Bengal High Court in 1939. 

His writings on Indian law include a study on Constitutional precedents as well as articles on human rights in India. He briefly served during 1944-45 as Prime Minister of Jammu and Kashmir. From February 1952 until his death, he was a judge of the Permanent Court of International Justice, The Hague. Before his election to the court, he was regarded as a candidate for UN Secretary-General.

Rau does not live in the hearts of Indians as the maker of the great Constitution of India. Ambedkar, who was placed as the team leader by Nehru, is projected as the supreme brain who gave the Constitution. Just one month later on February 26, no big leader or self-proclaimed statesman will remember Rau on his 130th birthday.

ANSWER  Honourable  Chief Justice of India

        

Please read  the below mentioned articles  detailing about crimes by dalits , hate  Speech  by dalits.  Please Answer What action taken against  those guilty dalits ? 

RTI  request to  CPIO  Ministry of Home Affairs  GOI  New Delhi

Ref : RTI no. MHOME/R/E/24/01003

We respect every human being equally irrespective of caste, religion , region , skin colour , gender , etc. All of us have human rights of equality by virtue of our birth. No government,  no Constitution  , no ambedkar,  nobody can take away those human rights. Those who violate our human rights are criminals.

Dalits faced caste discrimination is true. They need government support for their upliftment  good , needed. But not at the cost of others. Our Constitution,  government is feeding a dalit child by snatching away meal plate from General merit child. GM child is going hungry. Caste discrimination is bad , punishable. But what about reverse discrimination,  punishment ?

Please give us information regarding following :

Details of protests , satyagrahas , marches  Dr.B.R.Ambedkar  participated during India's freedom struggle , details of his incarceration if at all.

Details of dalits who participated in india's freedom struggle. Give us number of dalit freedom fighters and number of dalit population at that time.

Details of  british government service done by dr.b.r.ambedkar.

Details of action taken by government of india , government of maharashtra and Union law minister at that time dr.b.r.ambedkar  regarding mass murder of brahmins , brahmins holocaust in maharashtra after assassination of mahatma Gandhi.

Calling a dalit by caste name, making casteist comments  is a criminal offence and offender is punished. In the same way dalits call brahmins and others by caste slur , make casteist comments against  brahmins and others , details of action taken  against such dalits. See the tweets , replies of following dalit  twitter handles and respond

@DalitWithIphone

@BeingVidhya

@_amitbehere

@lokeshbag67

@AAPEyes

@ambedkariteIND

@BeingVidhya

@BhanuNand

@BhimArmyChief

@CasteTraitor

@DalitWithIphone

@redhead47617292

@ambedkariteIND

@thaiyaan

@thewarriorpoet7

Caste discrimination of  dalit  is a crime , details of action taken regarding reverse caste discrimination of brahmins and others by dalits , government.

Details of  action taken against criminal dalits who made fake sc st atrocity cases against innocents.

Details of action taken against dalit thugs  shown in the websites about dalit crimes mentioned at bottom of the page.

Details of action taken against late E.V.Ramasamy  alias periyar for his casteist slur , atrocities against brahmins and others.

Details of action taken against tamil nadu minister  udhayanidhi stalin , dmk spokes person rajiv gandhi , karnataka ministers Priyanka kharge , parameshwar  for their casteist slur , comments against hindus.

Details of action taken against dmk party personnel , mlas , mps ministers  who aided , sponsored tamil terrorists in srilanka.

In sc st atrocity cases , victims receive compensation from government. In fake atrocity cases does  the innocent who was framed by dalit get equal amount of compensation.

In india in every nook and corner there is either bust , statue , photo of ambedkar , many roads , land Mark's named after him. His birthday is a government holiday and officially celebrated by government. All these at tax payer's expense. Fine. There are numerous other freedom fighters who sacrificed more for the country than ambedkar like subhash chandra bose , bhagath singh , sardar Patel, maulana azad , lala Lajpat rai , etc. But no government holidays for their birth days , comparatively their celebrations are not grand , naming roads , land Mark's in their names is less , statues , busts , photos of  them are quite less in number than Ambedkar's. Give us details of criteria , parameters  followed by government for declaring holiday , naming land Mark's,  erecting statues , etc. Reasons for disparity.

Websites about dalit crimes :

All dalits are not oppressed , innocents as portrayed in the movies , tv  serials and media. There are few good human beings among dalits. Also there are criminals ,  rowdies among dalits. Dalit rowdies  oppress others ,  there are corrupt dalit  officials.   Please see the following  websites  and take action against dalit criminals.

“Law Should Not Result In Caste Hatred”

Allahabad HC Imposes ₹5 Lakh Cost On University Teacher For False Case Under SC/ST Act

https://www.verdictum.in/court-updates/high-courts/allahabad-manmohan-krishna-v-state-of-up-2024-ahc-31717-sc-st-false-case-university-teacher-1522224 

Physical assault and Fake SC ST Atrocity  Case

DaIit BSP leader slapped a Brahmin doctor on camera and later booked him under the SC ST act. He was beaten pre-planned by the local leader so that they could humiliate him. The BSP leader is identified as JITU JAKESIA the district president of BSP, Rayagada district. This is how they are beating on duty doctors and putting false cases for money. No one is supporting the doctor was was attacked by these men. An incident from Orissa.

https://twitter.com/Shubham_fd/status/1761015945139503450?t=oeaQTYzvt4hkaWA9PbB74Q&s=19  

Caste Discrimination by University

Very true!

There are special book-banks & library rules for reserved category students!

E.g. These book-banks have

-exclusive access to only SC/ST/BC students

-they can borrow more books

-they can keep books for longer duration

-no need to pay fine, etc!

Irony?

--That's the govt's way of removing "caste-discrimination"!

https://twitter.com/neha2180/status/1761309509107196299?t=2NRRdir7HadKeudG2dgjbQ&s=19 

Take action against Anti national dravidian

https://twitter.com/MrSinha_/status/1760925905759928384?t=Sr6So2Z4k4pJU9JFvJciNw&s=19 

Dalit  thugs attack a boy

https://twitter.com/ShubhamFdNP/status/1759973817860935874?t=BgmwJZEJCtiqC0bVsSNQTQ&s=19 

Rape of dalit girl by her father

https://twitter.com/neha2180/status/1759238046510391712?t=QBawCqGch0d4K-5UcQ-ztA&s=19 

Dalit hooligans

https://twitter.com/Shubham_fd/status/1751277918242640265?t=R--Cux3ou8-ti7aVLkZjgQ&s=19  

Dalit murderers burn house

https://twitter.com/naag549/status/1759057446289781227?t=8T3sTQX2gt7KGruPaChRAA&s=19 

Dalit thugs torture student

https://twitter.com/naag549/status/1759056505717084367?t=3rMgXgOLbd1g7Ym9gXAUwQ&s=19 

Murder of a priest

https://twitter.com/Shubham_fd/status/1753412144463548563?t=MiMSsd6K4qOiNQUTSJiNfw&s=19 

False Case by  SC tenant

https://twitter.com/neha2180/status/1760712408543416440?t=zIYVG6BBmpl5Fs7LiKZfxA&s=19  

 Caste discrimination

https://twitter.com/neha2180/status/1760525017056743651?s=19  

https://twitter.com/neha2180/status/1760527487912784214?t=3-SIrKyNJXmrehgZGpFZjw&s=19  

Fake dalit rape case

3 kids (even an 8 yr old child) booked under gang-rape charges under SC/ST act!

Reason??

Monetary compensation by government for gang-rape charges under SC/ST act = ₹8.25 Lakh

https://twitter.com/neha2180/status/1758862881590825269?t=ziFp-XKBDrzEZ1DzzXGDjA&s=19  

Fake Sc st atrocity case

https://twitter.com/Shubham_fd/status/1611389634927550465?t=Hg1xYxECWqEHS4drAZrfYg&s=19 

Crimes  by  Dalits  ,  Fake Atrocity  Cases

Biased ambedkar laws. Justice ? SHAME SHAME.

https://twitter.com/Shubham_fd/status/1753412144463548563?t=G0tKyIsCGnKzV8zW6_J7gQ&s=19  

https://twitter.com/Shubham_fd/status/1758855728251462093?t=H-P15CSRceYJ58LYwmQrIg&s=19 

https://twitter.com/nabilajamal_/status/1751108718643831256?t=EHfwRwUxEmtJLaJS3UVGEg&s=19 

https://twitter.com/neha2180/status/1758862881590825269?t=v2grIz695KRSZPY1VCqLpg&s=19 

https://twitter.com/Shubham_fd/status/1757667297055912105?t=RC1eEvrMq8lkTyXs_OBM8A&s=19 

https://twitter.com/Shubham_fd/status/1758855728251462093?t=jA1V6OK4XI-FN9p1APCySQ&s=19 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ndtv.com/india-news/hemant-soren-arrest-hemant-soren-ed-facing-enforcement-directorate-heat-hemant-soren-files-case-against-agency-4966842/amp/1 

CBI busts gang that lodged false SC/ST Act complaints to extort money: UP

September 15, 2022

The CBI has busted a gang that used to file false rape and criminal cases under Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act to blackmail people for extorting money in Prayagraj.

The probe was initiated after the Allahabad high court, last month, directed the investigation agency to conduct a preliminary inquiry into the gang, which is lodging fake cases against innocent people.

Most of these cases are registered at Mauaima police station in the trans-Ganga region of the district.

Orders were issued for investigation of 51 cases of rape and SC/ST Act on the PIL of a high court lawyer.

Among the total cases, 36 are registered at Mauaima police station while others are lodged at other police stations of the district.

The CBI team reached Prayagraj with a list of 51 cases registered at Mauaima, Kydganj, Shivkuti, Baharia, Colonelganj, Phaphamau and Daraganj police stations.

Police officials at Mauaima police station said the CBI officials were provided with copies of 24 FIRs lodged here.

The Phapahmau police also handed over a copy of FIR to the CBI in connection with a case of gang rape.

The CBI officials will now meet the victims in the cases registered at different police stations and take their statements, informed a senior district police official.

In one such case, a woman had lodged a case of gang rape against two lawyers at Daraganj police station earlier this year.

She claimed that the two lawyers had gang-raped her minor daughter in their car. However, during police investigations, it came to fore that the duo was falsely implicated and the victim herself was unaware that her mother had lodged an FIR for an alleged crime committed against her.

The two lawyers accused of gang-rape, approached the high court and filed a PIL. They claimed that a gang active in the district was involved in implicating innocent people in fake cases of rape, SC/ST Act, etc with intention of extorting money from them.

In response to their PIL, the HC asked the CBI to initiate inquiry in 51 such cases lodged at Mauaima and other police stations of the district.

In another such case lodged at Mauaima police station in 2021, a woman had lodged a case of gang-rape against five people of her village. However, the woman later changed her statement and no action was taken against the accused. The police had submitted a final report in the case.

A senior police official said the CBI team has been provided with the copies of FIRs of the cases mentioned in the order of the high court. The cases include rape, gang rape, those under SC/ST Act and even of minor assaults registered at some of the police stations, he added.

Both casteism and reverse casteism ?  must go

The Supreme Court has not rendered the SC/ST Act toothless. Rather, it’s welcome ruling against the law’s misuse ensures its �teeth� do not bite the innocent.

By Sudheendra Kulkarni

Indians have a tendency to look at a social problem only from one angle, an angle we have grown used to or conforms to our beliefs and biases. Social issues, however, do not lend themselves to such unidirectional understanding; they are often complex in their causes and manifestations. While some facts may be easily visible from one angle, facts of contrary significance can also be seen if we care to look at the issue from a different perspective. It is necessary to understand deep-rooted social issues in an integral manner.

One such big Indian problem that calls for a holistic understanding is casteism�in particular, the injustice and discrimination that people belonging to the scheduled castes and tribes are subjected to by the so-called �upper castes�. Atrocities against the SC and ST communities are an undeniable reality and a shameful blot on Hindu society. Such behaviour cannot continue or be condoned in a civilised society. The guilty must be punished in a swift and deterrent way. 

The Indian constitution has strong provisions (such as Article 17, which criminalises untouchability) to protect members of the SC and ST communities and other weaker sections of society. In 1989, the Rajiv Gandhi government introduced a new and stronger legislation, the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

But is there also another side to this reality? Is the Act being misused, to a considerable extent, against innocents belonging to the non-SC castes? And if this too is a reality, shouldn�t the victims of such wilful misuse get protection under Article 14 of the constitution (�The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law and equal protection of laws�)? Our constitution guarantees this fundamental right to every citizen, irrespective of caste, creed, gender or language.

Modi government filed the review petition to show it is not �anti-Dalit�

Sadly, when the Supreme Court took cognisance of this reality in its ruling on March 20, and introduced certain guidelines to prevent misuse of the Act, all hell, proverbially, broke loose. All political parties, ruling and opposition, came together to slam the apex court�s verdict. Feeling the heat of the allegation that it is �anti-Dalit�, the Narendra Modi government quickly filed a review petition. Nothing better was expected from the BJP, which is allowing expediency to trump over principles at a frightening rate. Alarm bells are already ringing for the ruling party, even though the 2019 Lok Sabha polls are a year away. Who wants to lose a vote bank?

However, even after the government announced its decision to file the review petition, certain �Dalit� groups organised a �Bharat bandh� on April 2 to protest against the court�s ruling. Nine people were killed, and valuable public-property was damaged, in angry protests in many states.

This show of vandalism masquerading as a cry for �social justice� did not impress the Supreme Court, which rightly decided not to accept the government�s plea for a stay on its ruling. The court will, however, hear the review petition soon.

Provoked by the agitation by �Dalits�, some �upper caste� organisations gave a call for their own �Bharat bandh� on April 10. Barring some stray incidents in some north Indian states, their protest was a damp squib. Nevertheless, their demand�that reservations should be based on economic criteria and not on caste�is sure to become more vocal in the years to come.

It is unfortunate that political parties, and also a large section of the print and TV media, have not bothered to examine the merits of the Supreme Court�s ruling. The merit is self-evident to all unprejudiced and justice-loving observers. Has the court ruled that the Act be scrapped? No. 

Has it rendered it �toothless�, and made it ineffective, as has been argued by all �Dalit� intellectuals and leaders? No. All that it has done is to ensure that the �teeth� of the law do not bite innocent people and, no less important, the flaws in the law do not �perpetuate casteism� in Indian society. It has done so by (a) affirming that it cannot remain �a mute spectator when the law is being misused to frame innocents in criminal cases�; and (b) laying down stringent guidelines (�no automatic arrest�) to prevent its misuse.

Critics of the Supreme Court�s ruling, who claim that misuse of the Act is an �exception�, ignore inconvenient facts. The court itself referred to the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) data for 2015, which shows that about 15% of the total complaints were false, and 75% of the cases resulted in acquittals or withdrawals.

Supporters of �Dalit� protests ignore inconvenient facts

Here is a highly inconvenient fact for �Dalit� agitators and their supporters. As reported by The Times of India on April 4, none other than Mayawati�s own government in UP had, in 2007, issued two orders highlighting that �the Atrocities Act was being misused to implicate innocents�. Thus, the government of the most important �Dalit� leader in India had asked the state police to do exactly what the Supreme Court has said in its ruling�not to arrest anyone merely on the basis of a complaint, but to first conduct an initial probe to find out prima facie guilt.

Another inconvenient fact: when mammoth, but entirely peaceful, �Maratha Kranti Morcha� rallies took place in almost every town and city in Maharashtra a year ago, their first demand was to scrap the Act. Why? Because of an incident involving the gangrape and murder of a minor Maratha girl. An isolated instance in a single village could not have brought lakhs of protesters on the streets. Notably, Sharad Pawar and Raj Thackeray, two important political leaders from Maharashtra, publicly said that the Act should be modified to prevent its misuse.

As someone who has been cataloguing actual, verifiable cases of misuse of the Act, let me present a sample here of how innocent victims suffer fear, humiliation and harassment.

In 2014, a case was registered against Dr T.P. Lahane, a reputed eye surgeon and dean of the government-run J.J. Hospital in Mumbai. Although he himself belongs to a nomadic tribe, a sweeper working in the hospital accused him of making a ‘casteist’ slur. After three years, he was acquitted by the trial court.

The Parle Tilak Vidyalaya Association runs some of the best colleges in Mumbai. It was established about 100 years ago by the followers of Lokmanya Tilak after his death. A former principal of one of its institutions, Dahanukar College, was falsely implicated in a case under the Act. It took 15 long years for him to be exonerated.

An ex-principal of Mumbai’s Sathaye College has been a victim of not one but two cases under the Act. In 2006, she issued several memos to a lab assistant for dereliction of duty and undisciplined behavior. He filed a case accusing her of making a �casteist� remark. The case, which ran for three years, ended with her acquittal. In another case in 2015, she was accused of �stealing� the fees from SC-OBC students. Fearing arrest, she had to avoid staying in her own house before getting anticipatory bail. Curiously, the government official who made the accusation has not appeared in court even once so far, nor furnished any evidence, although she has had to appear many appearances. She is sure of being acquitted, but none will be penalised for wrongfully using the Act against her.

M.P. Sadekar, a 78-year-old advocate (one of the founder-members of the Shiv Sena) has acted as an independent enquiry officer in many such cases. He introduced me to the persons who suffered in four of them. In one, a college lecturer, a habitual drunkard, fell in the classroom under the influence of alcohol. In another, a clerk had embezzled college funds. In a third, a teacher in a school for the deaf was suspended for physical assault on a student. In a fourth, an attendant in an engineering college was caught red-handed in a corrupt act. In all these cases, the Act was invoked when the authorities initiated disciplinary action. In each of them, the accusation was the same: use of casteist remarks. Each of them fell through. Such cases abound all over India, including many involving blackmail.

Sadly, reverse casteism�the phenomenon of some people belonging to SCs behaving in a casteist manner with those belonging to �upper castes� by abusing the protection given by the Act�is something rarely investigated by the media, studied impartially by academics, and highlighted by politicians. Doing so carries the risk of being branded �anti-Dalit�.

Critics of the Supreme Court ruling are pointing out that the conviction rate in the cases under the Act is very low. They are right in saying so. However, low rates of conviction do not justify wilful misuse of a law. Moreover, if complaints do not conclude in convictions, the responsibility lies with the executive, which has to improve the efficiency, sensitivity, and impartiality of the police. The higher executive cannot transfer its responsibility onto the higher judiciary.

Therefore, the Supreme Court would be failing the enlightened Indian constitution if it entertained the government�s review petition and withdrew its own welcome ruling.

Kerala HC cautions courts against false cases under SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act

The Kerala High Court the other day observed that many innocent persons are becoming  victims of false cases under the SC/ST Prevention Of Atrocities (POA) Act and urged  courts to carefully analyse cases that come under this Act while considering pleas for anticipatory bail, in order to rule out the possibility of false implication.

A single bench of Justice A Badhurudeen, while considering an application seeking anticipatory bail, said it was a shocking fact that many innocent persons are victims of false implications and, therefore, courts must pay great attention to the details when it comes to cases under the SC/ST (POA)  Act.

“It is shocking, rather a mind blowing fact that many innocent persons are victims of false implication under the SC/ST (POA) Act. Therefore, it is the need of the hour for the courts to segregate the grain from the chaff by analysing the genesis of the case, the antecedents prior to registration of the crime, with reference to existence of animosity between the complainant and the accused, with particular attention, vis-a-vis previous disputes/cases/ complaints, etc. while considering the question of prima facie case, when considering plea for pre-arrest bail,” the court said.

 Stating that it cannot be disputed that the stringent provisions of the SC/ST (POA) Act have been incorporated to curb the menace of atrocities against members of SC/ST communities, Justice Badhurudeen   said the court must go into the genesis of the cases to rule out the possibility of ulterior motives in filing complaints under the Act.

“…. in such cases, the court could very well hold that prima facie, the prosecution allegations could not be believed for the purpose of denying anticipatory bail, after leaving the question as to commission of offence/offences for a detailed and fair investigation by the Investigating Officer. Indubitably, such a course of action is necessary to rule out the possibility of false implication,” the court said.

The court made these observations in the order granting pre –arrest bail to the accused appellant,  who moved the High Court against the order of a Special Judge under the SC/ST (POA) Act that refused to grant  anticipatory bail to the  appellant.

75% Acquittals In SC/ST Act: HC Bar Association

BHOPAL: MP High Court Bar Association has said 75% of cases registered under the Prevention of Atrocities against SC/ST Act were fake.

Releasing results of a survey carried out by the association, its president Adarsh Muni Trivedi said the survey also showed that 81% cases under SC/ST Atrocities Act were registered against persons from OBC section, 14% upper castes and 5 percent minorities sections.

He said cases under SC/ST Atrocities Act presented in three benches of MP high court and district courts in 2015-16 were included in the survey. It was found that 90% complaints on which cases under the said Act were registered came from those belonging to SCs and only 10% STs had filed FIR for registration of case under the Act. In 75% of cases, the accused were acquitted by the court, he claimed Trivedi said the survey clearly shows provisions of Prevention of Atrocities against SC/ST Act were being misused and safeguards inserted by SC to check it were necessary.

SC/ST Act Cannot Be Used for Blackmail or Vendetta, Says Supreme Court

On Tuesday the top court issued a range of fresh rules, including prior sanction for arrest, to prevent the Act’s misuse.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday  ( March 20  2018 ) laid down strict guidelines to protect public servants and private employees from arbitrary arrest under the 1989 Scheduled Castes and Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

The Atrocities Act, in operation for three decades, protects members of SC/ST communities from casteist abuse and discrimination. In a strong indictment of continued misuse of the Act, the court observed in its judgment that the legislation has become an instrument to “blackmail” innocent citizens and public servants.

Under the new guidelines, public servants can be arrested only after getting written sanction from their appointing authority. In case of private employees, the complainant has to get permission from the senior superintendent of police. The reasons for allowing the arrest have to be given in writing and submitted to the accused and the concerned court.

In addition, a preliminary inquiry has to take place before filing an FIR. The new guidelines require the investigating agencies to ascertain whether the case falls under the ambit of the Atrocities Act or whether it is driven by political and personal reasons.

To avoid false implication of an innocent, a preliminary enquiry may be conducted by the DSP concerned to find out whether the allegations make out a case under the Atrocities Act and that the allegations are not frivolous or motivated,” ruled a bench of Justices A.K. Goel and U.U. Lalit.

The judgment came in response to a petition filed by Subhash Kashinath Mahajan, Maharashtra’s director of technical education, challenging an order of the Bombay high court. The court had rejected Mahajan’s plea contesting an FIR against him for disallowing prosecution of a department official. The official had been charged with making adverse remarks against an employee.

Quashing the case, the apex court, said the proceedings were a “clear abuse of process of court”. The bench observed that there has been a systematic abuse of the law for over three decades.

Quoting the judgment, a report in the Indian Express said, “It has been judicially acknowledged that there are instances of abuse of the Act by vested interests against political opponents in panchayat, municipal or other elections, to settle private civil disputes arising out of property, monetary disputes, employment disputes and seniority disputes. It may be noticed that by way of rampant misuse, complaints are largely being filed particularly against public servants/ quasi judicial/ judicial officers with oblique motive for satisfaction of vested interests.”

The bench made it clear that the Atrocities Act was never intended to be used as a tool for blackmail or personal vendetta. It also observed that rather than blur caste lines, the Act has been “used to file false complaints to promote caste hatred”, according to The Hindu.

While the 1989 Act denies bail to the accused, the apex court has now decided to permit anticipatory bail where there is no prima facie case. “Unless exclusion of anticipatory bail is limited to genuine cases… there will be no protection available to innocent citizens,” said the bench.

The court cited National Crimes Records Bureau (data from 2015, revealing that while closure reports had been filed in 15-16% of complaints under the Act, over 75 % of court cases had led to acquittals, withdrawals or compounding of all cases.

Edited, printed , published owned by NAGARAJA.M.R. @  # LIG-2   No  761, HUDCO  FIRST  STAGE , OPP WATER WORKS , LAXMIKANTANAGAR , HEBBAL ,MYSURU – 570017  KARNATAKA  INDIA     

Cell : 91 8970318202

WhatsApp  91  8970318202

Home page :

https://e-inquirer.blogspot.com/ 

 Contact  :  

naag@gmx.com