‘Adivasi’ term not offensive under SC/ST Act, rules Jharkhand High Court

THE JHARKHAND STORY NETWORK

Ranchi, April 29: In a significant ruling, the Jharkhand High Court has held that referring to an individual as “adivasi” does not, in itself, constitute an offence under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The decision was handed down by Justice Anil Kumar Choudhary in response to a petition filed by public servant Sunil Kumar, who sought the quashing of an FIR lodged against him.

Background

The case originated from an FIR filed at Dumka Police Station by a tribal woman who accused Kumar of verbally insulting her during a visit to his office to submit an application under the Right to Information Act. According to the complainant, Kumar rejected her application and allegedly referred to her as an “insane adivasi,” before forcibly removing her from his office and subjecting her to humiliation.

Also Read: Train services to be affected due to development work from May 1–7 in Jharkhand

Court’s Reasoning

Justice Choudhary clarified that the word “adivasi” is a general term for tribal persons and does not specifically identify a Scheduled Tribe as defined in the Constitution. As such, its usage—without targeting a community listed under the Act—does not, by itself, amount to an offence under the SC/ST Act.

The judgement emphasised that for the provisions of the Act to apply, there must be a deliberate and targeted insult linked to the victim’s specific caste or recognised tribal identity.

Defence Argument

Representing Kumar, advocate Chandana Kumari argued that the term had been used generically, with no intent to refer to any constitutionally recognised Scheduled Tribe. The defence maintained that since Kumar did not mention or allude to the woman’s specific caste or tribe, the case lacked grounds for prosecution under the SC/ST Act.

Legal Implications

This ruling provides important clarity on the contextual use of the word “adivasi” and its legal ramifications. It underscores the need for precise identification and intent in cases involving alleged offences under the SC/ST Act.