IMPORTANT POINT
Abuse using obscene language and indecent behaviour – Unless name of caste or tribe finds place in public notification made by President of India, such person cannot be treated as a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe – FIR quashed and set aside.

JUDGMENT

By the Court:-

Heard the parties.

2. This Writ Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with a prayer to quash the FIR being Dumka Sadar SC/ST P.S. Case No. 07 of 2023 dated 19.10.2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 504, 506, 354 of Indian Penal Code and under Section 3(1)(r)(s) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 which has been mentioned as SC/ST Act, 2016 in the formal FIR as well as the endorsement regarding registration of the case made on the FIR by the Officer- in-Charge of the concerned SC/ST police station.

3. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner while posted as settlement officer was approached by the informant- respondent no.4 lady with an application under Right to Information Act. It is alleged that the petitioner became enraged and refused to receive the said application under the Right to Information Act and told informant-respondent no.4 that they are insane Adivasis and they are coming to annoy and thereafter abused using obscene language and indecent behaviour and pushed the informant-respondent no.4 out of his chamber which humiliated the informant-respondent no.4. It is further alleged that many persons were present in the chamber of the settlement officer at the time of occurrence.

4. On the basis of the written report submitted by the informant- respondent no.4, registered Dumka Sadar SC/ST P.S. Case No. 07 of 2023 and took up investigation of the case and it is submitted at the Bar that the investigation of the case is still going on.

5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner by drawing attention of this Court to Section 2 (c) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Clauses 24 and 25 of Article 366 of the Constitution of India and also Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution of India that conjoint reading of the same goes to show that only the castes, races or tribes or parts of or groups within such castes, races or tribes as are deemed under Article 342 of the Constitution of India can be termed as Scheduled Tribes and those castes which has been mentioned in Article 341 of the Constitution of India can be termed as Scheduled Castes within the meaning of Section 2 (c) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the only caste which has been stated in the FIR is “Adivasi”.

6. Drawing attention of this Court to Annexure-9 which is the copy of the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950 at page no. 75 of the brief which is part XXII relating to Jharkhand, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that caste Adivasi has not been included in part XXII of the said Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950 and undisputedly, as the occurrence took place in the District of Dumka, which is within the State of Jharkhand and the only caste name that cropped up from the FIR is that the informant is a Adivasi but the caste Adivasi does not come under the ambit of Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes mentioned in Section 2 (c) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 hence, the sine-qua-non to constitute the offence under Section 2 (1) (r) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989; that the victim must be a member of schedule caste or a schedule tribe, is lacking so even if the entire allegation made in the FIR are considered to be true in its entirety, still the offence punishable under Section 3(1)(r) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 is not made out. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in order to constitute the offence punishable under Section 3(1)(s) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,