The registration of an FIR under the SC/ST (POA) Act and the state's assurance to provide police protection upon a formal application constitutes sufficient legal action to redress a petitioner's grievance regarding victim protection.

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed with the following relief:

“…to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declare the action of the respondents herein in not providing the police protection and registering the complaint under SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989 and IPC under relevant section of law as per the petitioners complaint dt.16/09/2020 as being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and violation of Sec. 154(3) of Cr.P.C. and violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, consequentially direct the respondents herein to provide police protection and consider the complaint made by the petitioner herein dt,16.09.2020 and pass............”

Heard Mr.V.Raghunath, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.D.Pradeep, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, as the respondent police authorities have failed to provide adequate protection and to effectively act upon the complaint under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989,( for short, ‘SC ST (POA) Act, 1989’) the present Writ Petition has been filed seeking appropriate directions.

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home submits that, upon receipt of the written representation of the petitioner, Crime No. 202 of 2020 was duly registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 294(b), 323, 324, 506 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, as well as Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), and 3(2)(v)(a) of the SC ST (POA) Act, 1989. It is further submitted that the police authorities are willing to provide protection, and that, upon receipt of any application from the petitioner seeking such protection, the same would be considered and extended after conducting the necessary enquiry. It is thus contended that the grievance of the petitioner has already been substantially redressed, and the petition is liable to be dismissed.

I have perused the material available on record.

Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader, it is evident that a criminal case has already been registered under the relevant provisions of the Indian Penal Code and the SC ST (POA) Act, 1989’. The registration of the crime and the assurance extended by the respondent authorities regarding provision of police protection, upon due enquiry, indicate that appropriate steps have been initiated in accordance with law.

It is pertinent to note that the provisions of the SC ST (POA) Act, 1989’, cast a statutory duty upon the authorities to ensure protection to victims of atrocities and to take prompt action on complaints. In this context, the Supreme Court in State of M.P. v. Ram Krishna Balothia , 1995 INSC 99, emphasized the object of the Act in providing stringent measures to prevent atrocities and protect members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. Further, in Subhash Kashinath Mahajan v. State of Maharashtra , 2018 INSC 248, the Court reiterated the need for a balanced approach ensuring both protection of victims and procedural safeguards.

In view of the above, and in light of the fact that the respondent authorities have already acted upon the complaint and expressed their readiness to provide protection as and when required, the grievance of the petitioner stands substantially addressed.

Accordingly, while granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the respondent police authorities by way of an appropriate application seeking protection, as and when required, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.