Use of the terms bhangi, neech, bhikhari and mangani does not amount to casteist slur: Rajasthan High Court

The court held that these words were not caste names, nor was there an allegation that the petitioners (from Rajput community) knew the caste of the public servants who had gone to remove the encroachment

In a far-reaching judgment, the Rajasthan High Court has held that the use of certain terms against Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes does not amount to casteist slur and does not constitute an offence under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The court dropped the charges framed under the Act against four persons accused of using such words.

A Tehsildar and some other government officials conducted a land encroachment survey by identifying and measuring a site in Jaisalmer on January 31, 2011. The four accused, belonging to Jaisalmer district, allegedly objected to the survey and assaulted the officials. They also allegedly abused the officials with words such as bhangi, neech, bhikhari and mangani.

Roughly translated into English, these terms mean sweeper, untouchable, lowly person, beggar, wretched, despicable, etc. “These words are not caste names, nor is there an allegation that the petitioners knew the caste of the public servants who had gone to remove the encroachment,” the court held.

Also Read | Making caste slur on SC/STs over phone an offence, says SC

The four accused, belonging to Rajput community, had challenged the framing of charges against them by a trial court on the basis of a protest petition filed by Tehsildar Harish Chandra. After an initial rejection, the trial court took cognisance of the matter and charges were framed under the SC/ST Act and various sections of Indian Penal Code (IPC).

‘No intention to humiliate officials’

A Single Judge Bench of Justice Birendra Kumar at the High Court’s principal seat in Jodhpur held earlier this week that the petitioners did not intend to humiliate the government officials for the reason that they were members of SC and ST communities. Their act was only in protest against the action of land measurement during the survey, the court said.

The petitioners’ counsel argued that the allegation of casteist slur lacked evidence to warrant a charge under Section 3(1)(r) of the SC/ST Act, which deals with intentional insult or intimidation aimed at humiliating a member of SC/ST communities in public view. The petitioners said they were unaware of the caste of the officials and that there were no independent witnesses present to confirm that the incident occurred in public view.

The court accepted the argument and said only the officials were witnesses of the incident and no independent witness had turned up. The police also did not find the allegation to be true after the investigation and the offence under the SC/ST Act was not made out, the court said in its five-page judgment.

While partially allowing the plea, the court discharged the petitioners from the SC/ST Act case by setting aside the framing of charges under the statute. However, the court upheld the remaining charges under the IPC related to obstruction in the official discharge of public duty by the respondents.

“For that act of the petitioners, the criminal prosecution will go on,” the court held. The Judge accepted the contention that only the trial under the IPC could proceed, as the registration of a case under the SC/ST Act was a “flagrant abuse” of the provisions of law. The petitioners did not intend to humiliate the Tehsildar and others for their being members of SC and ST communities, it said.

Published - November 16, 2024 08:02 pm IST