WhatsApp messages expressing opinion on caste reservation no offence under SC/ST Act: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court on Friday upheld the closure of a case against a woman who had been booked under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act) on allegations that she had sent casteist messages to her ex-boyfriend while ending a romantic relationship [VW v State of Maharashtra]..Justice Urmila Joshi-Phalke observed that the WhatsApp messages exchanged between the two, which included WhatsApp forwards, merely expressed views about caste reservation and did not promote feelings of enmity or hatred against SC/ST members.“On going through the entire material, it reveals that messages only show feelings expressed as to Caste Reservation System. Such messages nowhere show that there was any attempt to promote any enmity or hatred or ill-will against members of the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes ... At the most, it can be said that her target was just the complainant only. However, accused No.1 did not write any word which would create or promote any ill-will or enmity or hatred against members of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes," the Court said. .The case concerned a relationship between a 29-year-old software engineer and a 28-year-old woman, both from Madhya Pradesh (residents of Nagpur). The couple is said to have secretly married at a temple, keeping their union hidden from their families.However, the relationship later soured, allegedly after the woman discovered that her partner belonged to the Chambhar community, a Scheduled Caste. Her estranged partner later filed a complaint, alleging that she sent him messages that were derogatory and promoted animosity against Scheduled Castes. The woman’s father was also named in the case for allegedly supporting her actions..A trial court discharged the woman and her father on August 5, 2021, leading to an appeal by the complainant (former partner).The complainant’s counsel argued that the messages demonstrated an attempt to create hatred and enmity between communities, while the defense contended that the messages reflected the woman’s personal sentiments on the caste reservation system and contained no offensive language. The defense also pointed to the significant delay in filing the complaint, suggesting ulterior motives behind the allegations..While considering the case, Justice Joshi-Phalke emphasized the protective intent of the SC/ST Atrocities Act."The Atrocities Act has been enacted to improve the socio-economic condition of Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes and to protect them from various indignities, humiliation, and harassment. The legislation, thus, intends to punish acts committed against vulnerable sections of our society for the reason that they belong to a particular community," she noted..Upon reviewing the evidence, the Court concluded that the messages sent by the accused woman did not satisfy the legal criteria for an offense under Section 3(1)(u) of the SC/ST Act, which addresses actions that promote ill-will or hatred against Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.“Even perusal of the said messages shows that messages express opinion as to the Caste Reservation System. Other messages, only reference of Scheduled Caste is mentioned. Even none of messages talks about any act on the part of accused No.2 (father) showing that there is an attempt to create any hatred or enmity or ill-will regarding the Scheduled Caste,” Justice Joshi-Phalke remarked..The Court ultimately dismissed the appeal, upholding the trial court’s decision to discharge the accused..Advocate S Sonwane appeared for the complainant (appellant).Additional Public Prosecutor Nitin Autkar appeared for the StateAdvocate RK Tiwari appeared for the accused woman and her father.[Read Judgment]