UP Courts Crack Down On Misuse Of SC/ST Act, Sentence False Accusers

Lucknow: In a series of recent rulings, Special Courts in Uttar Pradesh have delivered stern verdicts against individuals found to have filed false cases under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Across four distinct cases in Lucknow and Barabanki, the courts acquitted the accused and sentenced the complainants to imprisonment, sending a strong message against the misuse of the Act.

In one instance, Sahdev had filed a complaint through the court on April 12, 2024, at Ghazipur police station against Satyanarayan and his son Sanjay, alleging robbery and invoking the SC-ST Act. The police investigation determined the allegations were false. Consequently, on April 2, the court sentenced Sahdev to seven years in prison and imposed a fine of `201,000 for filing a fabricated case.

Another case involved Ramesh Rawat, who had a financial dispute with Arun, Irfan Ali, Mohammed Zeeshan, and Rizwan. In 2022, Rawat, claiming to be from a Scheduled Caste, filed a case at Chinhat police station accusing them of assault and invoking the SC-ST Act. The investigation found the case to be false, leading the court on May 8 to sentence Rawat to five years in prison and a fine of `50,000.

Similarly, in a land dispute involving five bighas, Lakhan Singh filed a case against Sunil Dubey and others in 2014, alleging attempted murder, threats, vandalism, and SC-ST Act violations. The investigation revealed the charges were false. On May 16, the court sentenced Lakhan Singh to 10 years imprisonment and a fine of ₹251,000.

Finally, in Barabanki, Rekha Devi had filed a complaint on June 29, 2021, at Jaidpur police station against Rajesh and Bhupendra, alleging threats, gang rape, and invoking the SC-ST Act. The investigation, transferred to BKT based on the incident site, found the accusations to be false. On June 16, the court sentenced Rekha Devi to seven years and six months in prison along with a fine of `201,000.

These rulings underscore the judiciary's firm stance against the misuse of the SC-ST Act.