An offence under Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST Act requires the alleged caste-based insult or abuse to occur in a 'place within public view', meaning it must be audible and visible to an independent person. Private abuse within closed doors does not satisfy this statutory requirement.

O R D E R

1.Assailing the Petition No.169/2024 dated 14.02.2024 filed before the State Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes Commission in and by which, the 1^st respondent had lodged a complaint against the petitioners who are alleged to have castigated the 1^st respondent by using his caste name, the present Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioners.

2. The brief facts necessary for disposal of this Writ Petition are as follows:

It is the case of the petitioners that, the 1^st respondent herein alleged a property dispute with one Kannan and others and claimed that when he lodged a complaint as against those persons on 05.02.2024, the petitioners threatened and humiliated him by calling him by his caste name. He further alleged that these acts of the petitioners were intended only to pressure him to refrain him from pursuing registration of FIR against certain police officers in connection with the proceedings before the State Human rights Commission (SHRC). In the said complaint, he also referred to the registration of Crime No.26 of 2024 registered against him and his driver namely Madhavan for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 451, 294(b), 323, 324, 506(2) of IPC and Section 4 of TNPHW Act, 2022 on the basis of a complaint made by one Karuppayee aged about 97 years and claimed that the actions amounted to caste-based atrocities, as he belongs to Scheduled Caste, leading him to file a petition before the Tamil Nadu State SC/ST Commission. Aggrieved by the said petition, which has been taken cognizance of, the petitioners have come up with the present Writ Petition.

3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that, admittedly, there is no previous enmity between the petitioners and the 1^st respondent and that earlier, there was a civil dispute between the 1^st respondent and one Kannan and one Kavitha in respect of which, the said Kannan filed a Civil Suit in O.S.No.118 of 2019 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Thuraiyur which came to be dismissed on 01.12.2023. It is further submitted that, there was also a dispute between the 1^st respondent and said Kannan with regard to measurement of the suit property pursuant to which, the 1^st respondent lodged a complaint before the 3^rd petitioner, who refused to receive the same. Thereafter, the 1^st respondent made a complaint before the 2^nd petitioner, which was also refused. Aggrieved by the non- registration of the complaint by the 2^nd and 3^rd petitioners, the 1^st respondent approached the 1^st petitioner alleging that petitioners 2 & 3 had humiliated him by using his caste name. Based on the said allegations, on 13.03.2024, 1^st respondent made a complaint before the State Human Rights Commission and thereafter, lodged a complaint before the 2^nd respondent, the Tamil Nadu SC/ST Commission seeking action against the petitioners under Section 8 of the Act.

4. It is further submitted by the learned Senior Counsel that, even a bare perusal of the complaint lodged by the 1^st respondent against petitioners before the State Human Rights Commission and the 2^nd respondent reveals that the said complaint is a motivated one as the complaint lodged before the State Human Rights Commission does not contain any allegation relating to caste based-abuse as alleged by the 1^st respondent. However, such an allegation has be