Says rights of SC/ST were being compromised, alleges BJP conspiracy to dissolve the Bill
The Congress slammed the Narendra Modi-led NDA government as anti-Dalit on Wednesday for remaining silent before the Supreme Court about ruling on SC/ST Act. The apex court ruled that sanction of the appointing authority would be required before arrest or prosecution of the accused under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
Randeep Surjewala, Congress' media in-charge, alleged that the rights of people belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes were being compromised but the Modi government did not bother about it citing that instead of the Attorney General, the Centre sent his junior to represent it in the court.
Admitting that there could be few cases when the provisions of the Act may have been misused by complainants and the police, Surjewala questioned the wisdom of 'one odd case of misuse' prompting the apex court to render the Act ineffective.
Kumari Selja, former union minister and a prominent Dalit leader from Haryana, alleged that there was a conspiracy to not just dilute the Act but actually to dissolve it.
Describing the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and BJP as anti-Dalit, she recalled how the Act was passed by the Rajiv Gandhi Government in 1989 to protect the Dalits and Tribals.
The Congress' criticism follows the top court's ruling which clarified that the bar on anticipatory bail to the accused under the Act was not absolute.
A bench headed by Justices AK Goel and UU Lalit ruled that the preliminary inquiry must be conducted by a DSP rank officer to find out whether allegations were made up and whether there is a prima facie case and whether the allegations are frivolous or motivated.
Senior Congress leader Anand Sharma dared the Modi government to clear its stand on the issue and demanded a review of the decision by the Supreme Court.
"There were several decisions that were taken for the empowerment of the SC/STs. We are saddened by the decision that the law now doesn't agree to protect SC/STs. If this decision is not thought through again, it would raise many more questions," he said.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
 "Anand Sharma")
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}