2017 (3) TMI 1803 - SC - Indian Laws

Supreme Court upholds SCST Rules, dismisses appeal on retrospective effect, lower-ranking officers' investigations valid unless justice failed.

State of Bihar and Ors. Versus Anil Kumar and Ors.

State of Bihar and Ors. Versus Anil Kumar and Ors. - AIR 2017 SC 2716, 2017 (3) Crimes 211 (SC), 2017 (4) SCALE 704, (2017) 14 SCC 304 Issues Involved:1. Validity of the investigative process under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SCST Act).2. Competence and legitimacy of Rule 7 of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995 (SCST Rules).3. Validity of the notification issued by the State of Bihar dated 03.06.2002.4. Retrospective effect of the notification dated 03.06.2002.5. Impact of investigations conducted by officers below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police between 31.03.1995 and 09.08.2008.Detailed Analysis:1. Validity of the Investigative Process under the SCST Act:The Supreme Court examined the validity of the investigative process under the SCST Act, particularly focusing on the provisions of Section 3(2) of the Act, which outlines severe punishments for various offences committed against members of Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes. The Court noted that the consequences under the SCST Act are more serious and drastic than those under the Indian Penal Code. Therefore, it was argued that the investigative process should be handled by the highest authority possible, in accordance with the Rules framed by the Central Government.2. Competence and Legitimacy of Rule 7 of the SCST Rules:The Court affirmed the validity of Rule 7 of the SCST Rules, which mandates that an investigation under the SCST Act should be conducted by a police officer not below the rank of a Deputy Superintendent of Police. The Court held that the Central Government was competent and justified in framing this rule, considering the seriousness of the offences and the legislative intent behind the SCST Act.3. Validity of the Notification Issued by the State of Bihar Dated 03.06.2002:The notification issued by the State of Bihar authorized officers of the rank of Police Inspector, Sub-Inspector, and Assistant Sub-Inspector to investigate cases under the SCST Act. The Court upheld this notification, stating that Section 9 of the SCST Act allows the State Government to confer powers of arrest, investigation, and prosecution on any officer of the State Government. The Court concluded that the State Government was within its rights to extend these powers to officers below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police.4. Retrospective Effect of the Notification Dated 03.06.2002:The High Court had struck down the retrospective effect of the notification dated 03.06.2002, which was intended to be effective from 31st March 1995. The Supreme Court upheld this decision, stating that the notification could not have retrospective effect because Section 23 of the SCST Act does not vest the Central Government with the authority to exercise its rule-making power with retrospective effect.5. Impact of Investigations Conducted by Officers Below the Rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police Between 31.03.1995 and 09.08.2008:The High Court had declared that investigations conducted by officers below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police during this period would be invalid. The Supreme Court set aside this conclusion, referencing Section 465 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which states that an error or irregularity in investigation does not vitiate the prosecution unless it has caused a failure of justice. The Court noted that there was no evidence of prejudice or miscarriage of justice caused by investigations conducted by lower-ranking officers.Conclusion:The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal filed by the Appellant-accused and allowed the appeals filed by the State of Bihar. The Court upheld the validity of Rule 7 of the SCST Rules and the notification dated 03.06.2002 issued by the State Government. The Court also affirmed that the retrospective effect of the notification was invalid and that investigations conducted by lower-ranking officers between 31.03.1995 and 09.08.2008 were not automatically invalid unless they caused a failure of justice.