How can i protect myself against false cases of sc
Manoj Bansal
(Querist) 27 March 2015
This query is : Resolved
In my office, there is a man who is SC by cast and he is threatening some of us in office for trapping us in false cases regarding Schedule castes. what is this section under IPC. how can I protect myself if he tries to do this
Devajyoti Barman
(Expert) 27 March 2015
Do not mess with him and try to interact with him only when you are under CCTV surveillance.
There is no foolproof protection against lodging of false complaint.
M/s. Y-not legal services
(Expert) 27 March 2015
its according to your advocate that who going to deal your case if any lodged..
ajay sethi
(Expert) 28 March 2015
request management to install CCTV cameras in office . dont enter into any arguments with him
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 28 March 2015
If false complaint is lodged by them, you have to defend yourself. Better avoid confrontation.
SAINATH DEVALLA
(Expert) 28 March 2015
The sc/st act is misused bu more than 80% for personal gains.Need not panic,but do not uneccesarily involve yourself.
Go through this atricle:
Amid allegations of abuse of the SC/ST (prevention of atrocities) Act, a PIL filed in the Madras HC now says the law, which was made further stringent through an ordinance by the UPA government at the Centre days ahead of the general elections, is discriminatory as it treated all non-dalits as a separate class.
Pointing out that a majority of cases registered under the Act end in acquittal, indicating its abuse, the PIL filed by Advocates Forum for Social Justice president K Balu said the amended version of the legislation said onus of disproving the accusation of atrocity on dalits was on non-dalits facing the charge.
Referring to the harassment allegations levelled by a judge of the Madras high court against some of his companion judges, the petition said, "The need for judicial review is indispensable due to the havoc it creates in the public administration, from class IV employees to high court judges."
The first bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Satish K Agnihotri and Justice M M Sundresh issued notice to state and central governments, and asked them to file their responses in three weeks.
Seeking to distinguish the term untouchability as mentioned in the Constitution from 'atrocity' as defined in the Act, Balu said the latter had gone beyond the constitutional mandate. Article 17 of the Constitution, in fact, does not confine the issue untouchability to SC/STs alone, he said, adding, "It addresses untouchability against all classes in general, without restricting it to any particular class. It is not addressed in favour of SC/STs as a separate class." Article 17 intends to punish "whoever commits an act of untouchability against any person", and there is no special reference to SC/STs, he said. The ordinance promulgated by the UPA government, however, opens with the sentence, "whoever not being member of the SC/ST," restricting untouchability to a particular community. "The Constitution never conceived and expressed the term atrocity on a par with untouchability," Balu said.
The PIL wanted the court to declare the provisions of the Act as unlawful, and as an interim measure restrain the authorities from registering any complaint under any of the provisions of the Act.
T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate
(Expert) 29 March 2015
