The Supreme Court has held that an alleged caste-based insult does not occur “within public view” merely because it takes place on school premises. The decisive question is whether members of the public could witness or hear the alleged words.
A Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta allowed an appeal filed by school manager Ramkrishna Chauhan.
“The mere fact that the occurrence took place within the premises of a school does not, by itself, satisfy this requirement.”
Why it matters. Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act require the alleged insult, intimidation or caste-name abuse to occur at a place “within public view”. The ruling clarifies that a nominally public institution is not enough: the prosecution material must show that members of the public could actually see or hear the alleged incident.
A quarrel inside the school office
The complainant’s sons studied at the school managed by Chauhan. According to the prosecution, one son was injured in a quarrel with other students on January 24, 2020. When the complainant approached Chauhan, he was allegedly abused and assaulted by Chauhan and members of the school staff. The FIR also alleged caste-based abuse.
The police filed a chargesheet on March 17, 2020. On August 8, 2022, the Special Judge took cognizance formally decided to proceed—and summoned the accused under Sections 147, 323, 342 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST Act.
Chauhan’s wife had lodged a cross-FIR on the same day, alleging that the complainant had assaulted her in the school office.
The Allahabad High Court refused to interfere on April 10, 2023. It held that describing the case as a counterblast was insufficient to quash it and that the prosecution material disclosed a prima facie case.
The reasoning
The alleged incident was inside an enclosed room. The investigating officer’s site plan identified room “A” as the place of occurrence. The Supreme Court noted that the room was enclosed, without a window or public access. The FIR did not claim that members of the public were present or could hear the alleged words.
No specific caste-based words were attributed to Chauhan. Neither the FIR nor the complainant’s statement identified any particular caste-based expression allegedly used by him. The allegation remained general.
Four teachers gave statements during the investigation. None said that they were inside the office when the alleged words were spoken or that they heard any caste-based abuse. Their presence elsewhere on the school premises could not establish “public view”.
The Court acknowledged that evidence need not be meticulously evaluated when cognizance is taken. However:
“The basic ingredients of the offence must emerge from the material placed before the Court.”
The Judgement
The Supreme Court allowed Chauhan’s appeal and set aside the Allahabad High Court’s April 10, 2023 judgment.
It quashed the proceedings arising from FIR No. 37 of 2020 against Chauhan only insofar as they concerned Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST Act. The prosecution will continue for the remaining IPC offences under Sections 147, 323, 342 and 504.