The Allahabad High Court has held that merely calling a person by referring to his or her profession, would not by itself attract the provisions of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, unless it is established that those words were intentionally used with intent to humiliate the victim belonging to SC/ST community.

The High Court was considering a criminal appeal filed under Section 14-A(1) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 by the appellant against the summoning order passed in a case registered under Sections 323, 504, 506 of the IPC and Sections 3(1) (Da), 3(1) (Dha) of the SC/ST Act.

The Single Bench of Justice Anil Kumar-X held, “The question, therefore, arises whether the use of a word indicating the profession of the victim would constitute an offence under the SC/ST Act. This Court finds that merely calling a person by referring to his or her profession, would not by itself attract the provisions of the SC/ST Act, unless it is established that those words were intentionally used with intent to humiliate the victim belonging to community of SC/ST.”

Advocate Paritosh Sukla represented the appellant while Government Advocate represented the Respondent.

Factual Background

The alleged dispute occurred between the parties after the respondent/complainant demanded her wages from the appellant. The respondent / complainant had allegedly used words indicating the profession of the victim.

Reasoning

On a perusal of the facts of the case, the Bench noted that the complainant herself stated that she used to wash clothes of the appellant and, on the alleged date, she had gone to their house to demand the wages for the clothes washed by her. She further stated that while she was returning, the appellants met her on the way, where she again demanded her wages.

“These facts clearly reflect that a contractual relationship existed between the parties, wherein the respondent/complainant used to wash the clothes of the appellant”, it added.

Thus, holding that merely calling a person by referring to his or her profession would not, by itself, attract the provisions of the SC/ST Act, the Bench partly allowed the appeal.

The Bench quashed the summoning order as well as the proceedings in the Complaint Case insofar as they related to offences under Section 3(1) (Da), 3(1)(Dha) of the S.C./S.T. Act. “However, the proceedings in respect of the remaining offences under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. shall continue in accordance with law”, it concluded.

Cause Title: Harshit @ Honey v. State of U.P. and Another (Neutral Citation: 2026:AHC:40988)

Appearance

Appellant: Advocates Paritosh Sukla, Shashwat Shukla

Respondent: Government Advocate, Advocates Krishna Kant Dubey, Santosh Kumar Dubey

Click here to read/download Order


Allahabad High CourtJustice Anil Kumar-X

Tulip Kanth

Assistant Editor

Tulip Kanth is an Assistant Editor at Verdictum having over 5 years of experience in the field of legal journalism and editing. She extensively covers judgments of the Supreme Court, High Courts as well as Tribunals. She has previously worked with a legal publishing website where she oversaw the work of other editors and has also created updates on notifications of different Government Ministries. She holds an English Honours Degree from SGTB Khalsa College, Delhi University and has completed her LLB course with specialisation in Corporate Law from Amity University.