Shivraj Singh Chouhan’s remark on SC/ST Act under attack, hearing today

Gwalior: In the Gwalior-Chambal region of Madhya Pradesh where the Swaran (upper caste) protests are the loudest, chief minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan’s statement — “no arrests before probe in SC/ST Act cases” – will face a crucial legal test before the Gwalior HC on Thursday.

“It was a political statement at best. No official orders were issued to bring it into effect as it is out of the executive’s jurisdiction anyway. The state told the HC last week that the CM’s words have no legal sanctity.

The public has rejected the CM’s words and the Gwalior HC will give its final verdict,” said former IAS officer Hiralal Trivedi.

Trivedi heads the SAPAKS Party that was formed last week to contest all seats on the issue of rights of upper castes and OBCs against the SC/ST Ordinance brought in by the Centre. Its candidates will soon start filing their nominations.

Trivedi’s claim has been bolstered by an order by the HC on October 4 in which Judge GS Ahluwalia cited the written reply filed by the superintendent of police, Shivpuri, in the court that said the statement made by the CM at an election meeting on September 20 “has no legal sanctity and no written instruction has been received by the SP in this regard from the state of Madhya Pradesh”.

This was after a Shivpuri resident Atendra Singh Rawat went to the HC on October 1 pleading for anticipatory bail in an SC/ST Act case lodged against him, citing the CM’s September 20 assurance.

The court found the SP’s reply to be “vague” and fixed the next hearing for October 11, the petitioner’s lawyer Atul Gupta told ET. The Shivpuri SP in his reply said he had sought instructions from the state in the matter but received none so far. The October 4 order reads: “The counsel for the state (additional advocate general Vishal Mishra) prayed for an adjournment to file a detailed reply with regard to the fact that whether any such public statement was made by the CM and if it was made, then whether in compliance with such public declaration, the police would conduct an enquiry prior to effecting arrest of the accused or not?” The state was also asked by HC to clarify about the “nature of the enquiry which shall be proposed by the state before arresting an accused”.

The court also noted that “if the authorities are of the view that the investigating officer, if feels necessary, may arrest an accused without any permission from the senior officer, then it may give an uncontrolled and unchallenged discretionary power to the investigating officer”. As per Section 18 (1) (a) and (b) of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities Act) which stands restored by the Centre’s ordinance after the Supreme Court’s intervention, if the investigating officer feels necessary, it does not require the permission of the senior police officer to arrest an accused.

The SC had quashed this provision. Trivedi of SAPAKS, meanwhile, said the issue has caught the imagination of people across the state and will hurt both the BJP and the Congress.

“We will be choosing our candidates through public consultation and they will be directly filing their nominations as we do not want the powerful parties like BJP and Congress to put pressure on them if we bring out a list of our candidates beforehand,” Trivedi said.

He said their party is not against any caste or community, but wants reservation benefits should be based on “poverty status” and the policy of having reservation in promotions should be quashed.