How Atrocities Act has become a bone of contention

Mahesh Vijapurkar

The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, commonly known as the Atrocities Act in Maharashtra, has become a bone of contention in the state. The Marathas, the dominant cast claiming backwardness hence reservations, insist it is being used by Dalits to harass them.

The Dalits, historically oppressed, insist there is no such thing because they are barely able to use the Act for redressal because most cases they take to police stations do not even get registered, leave alone investigated. The State’s Protection of Civil Rights Cell has not received a single complaint of its misuse.

After Dalits abandoned a non-inclusive Hinduism and embraced Buddhism under BR Ambedkar’s leadership there has been an animus against them. There was a strong opposition to renaming Marathwada University after the mahamanav. Astute politicians like Sharad Pawar found it a difficult task to make Dalits happy and it took years to rename it.

The neo-Buddhists are a militant but non-violent, self-respecting community and have gotten into the Maratha craw. They are educating themselves, and despite their support is to a plethora of Ambedkarite political parties, have a sense of oneness as a community. It is as strong as the Marathas’, now demanding reservations.

Marathas may well have their justified reasons – loss of agricultural holdings, poor farm yields, even debt-driven suicides, low employment ratios compared to others – despite their social and political dominance. Their economic situation may warrant attention, with or without reservations. They see themselves as backward as the traditionally oppressed.

The State Government will have to convince the courts where the reservations issue is hanging that the reservations demanded are legitimate. But it cannot meet the Maratha demand that the Atrocities Act be either withdrawn or tweaked to ensure they are not “misused”. Such a tweaking is not within the scope of the State Government.

It can at best plead with the Centre and little else for it is an Act of Parliament, to even soften it. It is unlikely to meet the approval of other states and political parties because Dalits are truly oppressed, mistreated, and constitute a significant voting segment. They vote much more religiously across the country than most urban voters do.

DevendraFadnavis has assured the Marathas that the Government do its utmost to secure them the quotas they seek, but on the issue of the Atrocities Act, he Is firm. No seeking its withdrawal, and no dilution of any of its aspects. However, a legislative committee could be set up to ensure its proper implementation: avoiding its misuse and also, safeguard Dalit interests.

The Act is no do doubt stringent, and it had been strengthened by listing new crimes via a Bill to amend it, which came into force as an Act only a few months ago. The Centre has written to all States of its “concern” at the allegation of atrocities “despite provisions of an enabling Act”. It wants its implementation to be “more effective”.

The Maharashtra Chief Minister has conceded that between 1,400-2,000 cases are registered a year and Dalit activists insist that the number is far less than in other States. A Dalit question is: if they were about one per cent of all cases registered, which means, the law was barely used, how could anyone allege they were misused to harass the upper castes?

Harassments can be not by the filing of cases but the mere threat to use them. However, even now, there are not enough designated courts as required in the State. Were a case to be filed, it could tie down a person for time-consuming engagement with the courts to prove ones’ innocence but a Dalit would hardly have the resources to pursue cases.