NEW DELHI : Supreme Court refuses to stay its earlier order on the SC/ST Act while hearing Centre’s review petition for reconsideration of March 20th judgement; asks all parties to file written reply within 3 days; Next hearing scheduled in 10 days; Apex court says its order is not against the Act but was made to prevent persecution of innocent persons.
The government, despite an urgent and open court hearing of its review petition against the verdict, failed to convince a Bench of Justices A.K. Goel and U.U. Lalit on Tuesday to suspend their judgment considering the massive protests across the country that claimed nine lives on April.
“An innocent should not be punished. There should not be terror in society… We do not want any member of the SC/ST to be deprived of his rights. We only want an innocent not to be punished,” Justice Goel observed.
The apex Court to consider Centre’s review petition on SC/ST Act in detail after ten days; Asks parties to file written submissions in three days; Home Minister Rajnath Singh tells Lok Sabha that Govt has worked to strengthen the law, not dilute it.
Hearing the centre’s review petition against its March 20 judgement on the SC/ST Act the Supreme Court has said it will consider in detail the Centre’s  petition but declined to keep in abeyance the directions passed by it to deal with the issues of arrest and sanction under the special law.
A bench comprising Justices A K Goel and U U Lalit has listed the Centre’s review petition after 10 days for detailed hearing and asked the Maharashtra government and others to file written submissions within two days. Centre has termed it a big achievement.

The bench made it clear that it has not diluted any provision of SC/ST Act but has only safeguarded the interests of the innocents from being arrested. The bench also clarified that there was no dilution of any provision of the SC/ST Act or Rules and said a compensation can be paid to the alleged victims of atrocities even prior to the registration of FIR under SC/ST Act.

The bench said the only offences mentioned in the SC/ST Act were the subject matter of the judgement and other cognizable offences under IPC would not require inquiry before registration of FIR.

The apex court also said in the direction that it has only given the outer limit of seven days for completing the inquiry for the offences registered under the SC/ST Act.Earlier the centre had filed a review petition against the March 20 verdict.

The union government, in its review petition, said the March 20 verdict has wide ramification and implication resulting in dilution of the stringent provisions of law enacted under the 1989 enactment. Petitiion said that it adversely affects a substantial portion of the population of India being the members of SC/ST. It also termed it contrary to the legislative policy of Parliament as reflected in the Prevention Of Atrocities Act 1989.
On March 20, the apex court had said that “in view of the acknowledged abuse of law of arresting cases under the Atrocities Act, arrest of a public servant can only be after approval of the appointing authority and of a non-public servant after approval by the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) which may be granted in appropriate cases if considered necessary for reasons recorded.

To avoid false implication of an innocent, the top court had also directed that a preliminary enquiry may be conducted by a DSP rank officer to find whether the allegations make out a case under the Atrocities Act and are not frivolous or motivated. Dalit organizations are protesting the verdict of the apex court.
(With Agency Inputs )..

ders in the case.