TOPIC: “RAPE OF BLIND DALIT GIRL- THE SOFT TARGET”

PROVISION: S. 3(2)(v)SC/ST ACT & S.376 IPC\

Q. In Which Case Recently, The Sc  Has Doubted Earlier Judgments On S.3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, By Observing That This Provision Will Attract As Long As Caste Identity Is One Of The Grounds For The Occurrence Of Offence ?

RELEVANT CASE LAW:

 PATAN JAMAL VALI VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH  LL 2021 SC 231

The D.B., on 27-04-2021, doubted the earlier judgments which interpreted Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,1989, to mean that the offence should have been committed "ONLY ON THE GROUND that the victim was a member of the Scheduled Caste.

 OBSERVED THAT

This provision will attract AS LONG AS CASTE IDENTITY IS ONE OF THE GROUNDS for the occurrence of the offence.

REASONS:

To deny the protection of Section 3 (2) (v) on the premise that the crime was not committed against an SC & ST person solely on the ground of their caste identity is to deny how social inequalities function in a cumulative fashion.

SEXUAL VIOLENCE AGAINST SCHEDULED CASTE WOMEN WITH DISABILITIES- THE SOFT TARGET

Q. Whether True Reading Of Section 3(2)(v) Of The Scheduled Castes And The Scheduled Tribes Prevention Of Atrocities Act 1989 Would Entail That Conviction Under This Provision Can Be Sustained As Long As Caste Identity Is One Of The Grounds “& Not The Only Ground” For The Occurrence Of The Offence ?

A. YES

SQ. Whether The Testimony Of A Prosecutrix With A Disability, Or Of A Disabled Witness For That Matter Is Weak Or Inferior ? What is the yardstick/test to appreciate her testimony ?Discuss Its Evidentiary Value.

A. NO

1. The testimony of a prosecutrix with a disability, or of a disabled witness for that matter, cannot be considered weak or inferior ,
2. ONLY BECAUSE such an individual interacts with the world in a different manner, vis-a-vis their able-bodied counterparts.

TEST-

• As long as the testimony of such a witness otherwise meets the criteria for inspiring judicial confidence,
• it is entitled to full legal weight.

SQ. Can You Enumerate Guidelines To Make Our Criminal Justice System More Disabled-Friendly, As Laid Down By Apex Court Recently ?

RELEVANT CASE:

PATAN JAMAL VALI vs THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH 2021 JC(SC)2856

GUIDELINES

A.

1. The NATIONAL JUDICIAL ACADEMY and state judicial academies are requested to sensitize TRIAL AND APPELLATE JUDGES to deal with cases involving survivors of sexual abuse.
2.  This training should Acquaint Judges With The Special Provisions , concerning such survivors.
3. It should also cover Guidance On The Legal Weight to be attached to the testimony of such witnesses/survivors, consistent with our holding above.
4.  PUBLIC PROSECUTORS AND STANDING COUNSEL should also undergo similar training in this regard.
5. The BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA can consider introducing COURSES IN THE LL.B PROGRAM that cover these topics and the INTERSECTIONAL NATURE OF VIOLENCE more generally;

B.

1. Trained SPECIAL EDUCATORS and INTERPRETERS must be appointed to ensure the effective realization of the reasonable accommodations embodied in the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 2013.
2. All POLICE STATIONS should maintain a database of such

• EDUCATORS,
• INTERPRETERS AND
• LEGAL AID PROVIDERS ,

in order to facilitate easy access and coordination;

C.

1. The NATIONAL CRIMES RECORD BUREAU should seriously consider the possibility of maintaining disaggregated data on gender-based violence.
2.  Disability must be one of the variables on the basis of which such data must be maintained so that the Scale Of The Problem can be mapped out and Tailored Remedial Action can be taken;

D.

1. Police officers should be provided SENSITIZATION, ON A REGULAR BASIS,to deal with cases of SEXUAL VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN WITH DISABILITIES , in an appropriate way.
2. The training should cover the FULL LIFE CYCLE OF A CASE involving a disabled survivor ,

• FROM ENABLING THEM TO REGISTER COMPLAINTS,
• OBTAIN NECESSARY ACCOMMODATIONS,
• MEDICAL ATTENTION AND SUITABLE LEGAL REPRESENTATION.

1. This training should emphasize the importance of interacting directly with the disabled person concerned, as opposed to their care-taker or helper, in recognition of their agency;

E.

1. and AWARENESS-RAISING CAMPAIGNS must be conducted, in accessible formats, to inform women and girls with disabilities, about their rights when they are at the receiving end of any form of sexual abuse.
2. Presumptions of such nature which construe disability as an incapacity to participate in the legal process reflect not only an INADEQUATE UNDERSTANDING of how disability operates
3.  but may also result in a miscarriage of justice through a devaluation of crucial testimonies given by persons with disabilities.
4. The legal personhood of persons with disabilities cannot be premised on SOCIETAL STEREOTYPES of their SUPPOSED INFERIORITY , which is an AFFRONT TO THEIR DIGNITY and a negation of the principle of equality .
5. The testimony of a prosecutrix with a disability, or of a disabled witness for that matter, cannot be considered weak or inferior ,
6. ONLY BECAUSE such an individual interacts with the world in a different manner, vis-a-vis their able-bodied counterparts.

TEST-

• As long as the testimony of such a witness otherwise meets the criteria for inspiring judicial confidence,
• it is entitled to full legal weight.

SQ. Whether The Language As Used In Section 3(2)(v) SC/ST ACT Actually Means That The Offence Should Have Been Committed Only On The Ground That The Victim Was A Member Of The Scheduled Caste ?

A. Not exactly.

In fact, the correctness of this exposition is debatable.

RELEVANT CASE LAW:

PATAN JAMAL VALI VS THE STATE OF A.P. 2021 JC(SC) 2856

• The statutory provision does NOT UTILIZE the expression ONLY on the ground .

D?? NOT BE SUPRA LEGISLATURE/ CAVEAT FOR JUDGES

• Reading the expression ONLY would be to Add A Restriction Which Is Not Found In The Statute.
• The statute undoubtedly uses the words ON THE GROUND
•  but the juxtaposition of THE before ground
•  does not invariably mean that the offence ought to have been committed ONLY on that ground.

REASON:

To read the provision in that manner will DILUTE A STATUTORY PROVISION which is meant to safeguard the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes against acts of violence which pose a THREAT TO THEIR DIGNITY .

CONCLUSION:

A true reading of Section 3(2)(v) would entail that conviction under this provision can be sustained as long as Caste Identity Is One Of The Grounds for the occurrence of the offence.

 Note: w.e.f. 26.01.2016 “ON THE GROUND THAT” as earlier used u/S.3(2)(v) SC/ST,1989 is substituted by “KNOWING THAT”.

Note: In the view which SC ultimately take, a reference of these decisions to a larger bench in this case held to be unnecessary; but SC has kept that open and the debate alive for a later date and case.