"SC/ST Atrocities Act Cases Hit Five-Year High; Convictions Double by 2024"
Prevention of Atrocities (PoA) Act, 1989
Central law criminalising caste-based offences by non-SC/ST persons against SC/ST individuals
Special Court
Dedicated court mandated under the PoA Act to exclusively try atrocity offences at the district level
The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — commonly known as the PoA Act — was enacted in recognition that constitutional guarantees of equality had not translated into freedom from caste-based violence and humiliation on the ground. The Act criminalises a specific catalogue of offences committed by non-SC/ST persons against SC/ST individuals, covering forced labour, social boycott, sexual violence, land dispossession, and destruction of property. It was substantially strengthened by the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015, which added new offences, mandated exclusive Special Courts in every district, and introduced restrictions on anticipatory bail — a provision that generated significant judicial controversy and was ultimately upheld by the Supreme Court.
The constitutional architecture underpinning the legislation rests on Articles 15, 17, and 46. Article 17 abolishes untouchability and makes its practice a punishable offence; Article 15(4) permits the state to make special provisions for SCs and STs; and Article 46 (a Directive Principle) directs the state to promote the educational and economic interests of weaker sections and protect them from social injustice and exploitation. The older Protection of Civil Rights (PCR) Act, 1955 complements the PoA Act by specifically targeting offences arising from the practice of untouchability. Both Acts are implemented together under a Centrally Sponsored Scheme (CSS) administered by the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, which releases funds to states for victim relief, legal aid, and enforcement capacity.
A structurally important constraint is that 'Police' and 'Public Order' are State subjects under List II of the Seventh Schedule. While Parliament legislates on atrocities, the actual machinery of enforcement — investigation, prosecution, and victim protection — rests with state governments. This Centre-State asymmetry is a persistent source of implementation gaps and is directly visible in the data on conviction rates and trial pendency.
The PoA Act operates through a set of mandatory institutional mechanisms designed to overcome the systemic disadvantages SC/ST victims face in ordinary criminal proceedings. Investigation must be conducted by an officer of at least Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) rank, ensuring that cases are not buried at the constabulary level. Exclusive Special Courts (and in some states, Exclusive Special Courts at the district level) are mandated to try offences under the Act, with a Special Public Prosecutor appointed for each court. Victims are entitled to immediate relief — including food, clothing, shelter, and medical aid — irrespective of the outcome of the trial, funded through the CSS.
The National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), under the Ministry of Home Affairs, compiles and publishes the authoritative Crime in India report annually, which is the primary data source for tracking registered cases, chargesheets, arrests, convictions, and trial pendency under the PoA Act. …
Which of the following statements about a Zero First Information Report (Zero FIR) under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 is/are correct?
1.A Zero FIR can be lodged at any police station, even though the place of commission of a cognizable/non-cognizable offence is outside the territorial jurisdiction of that police station.
2.The Officer-in-Charge of the police station where a Zero FIR has been lodged may, with the permission of the competent authority, initiate a preliminary enquiry.
3.Under Zero FIR, it is obligatory for the informant to furnish information electronically.
Select the answer using the code given below:
With reference to the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, consider the following statements:
1.Investigation of offences under the Act must be conducted by an officer of at least the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police.
2.The Act draws its constitutional basis from Articles 15, 17, and 46.
3.The 2015 Amendment restricted anticipatory bail for accused persons in atrocity cases.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Which of the following best explains why the Central Government faces structural limitations in enforcing the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, despite being its legislative author?
Consider the following pairs relating to the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act framework:
1.Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955 — Targets offences arising from the practice of untouchability
2.National Commission for Scheduled Castes — Constituted under Article 338 of the Constitution
3.Centrally Sponsored Scheme for PoA Act — Administered by the Ministry of Home Affairs
Which of the pairs given above is/are correctly matched?
Assertion (A): The SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2018 restored the original stringency of the 1989 Act by removing the preliminary inquiry requirement and restrictions on automatic arrest.
Reason (R): Parliament enacted the 2018 Amendment to reverse a Supreme Court judgment that had diluted key procedural protections of the original Act.
Which of the following is correct?
Want the full note, Prelims Facts & MCQ answers?
Create a free account — takes less than a minute.
Create free account