Supreme Court quashes charges under SC/ST Act and IPC for lack of public view or intent to cause alarm, ruling that the ingredients were not made out.
Case Name: Gunjan @ Girija Kumari and Others v. State (NCT of Delhi)
Citation: 2026 INSC 468
Date of Judgment/Order: 11 May 2026
Bench: Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice N.V. Anjaria
Held: The Supreme Court held that charges under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act) and Indian Penal Code (IPC) cannot be framed unless the incident of caste-based abuse and criminal intimidation occurs in a place within public view, and unless there is a criminal intention to cause alarm to the complainant. The Court clarified that while caste-based insults and intimidation are serious offenses, the statutory requirement of “public view” under Section 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST Act is indispensable, and the failure to establish this essential element renders the charge unsustainable. Furthermore, the charge of criminal intimidation under Section 506 IPC and Section 34 IPC requires evidence of common intention, which was lacking in this case.
Summary: The appellants in this case, including Gunjan @ Girija Kumari, were accused of hurling caste-based abuses and intimidating the complainant, who is a member of the Scheduled Caste. The incidents were alleged to have occurred in a private setting, specifically in the complainant’s residence, where the accused allegedly used derogatory words and made threats. The FIR and charge-sheet did not establish that the incident took place in a public place or that there was any public witness to the caste-based insults, which is a necessary condition to constitute the offense under the SC/ST Act. The High Court had upheld the trial court’s order to frame charges, but the Supreme Court quashed the charges, finding that the essential ingredients of public view and criminal intention were not met.
Decision: The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the orders of the High Court and the trial court, and quashed the FIR and the charges framed under Section 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST Act, as well as Section 506 read with Section 34 of the IPC. The Court emphasized that for charges to be framed under the SC/ST Act, the abuse or insult must occur in a place within public view, and for criminal intimidation, there must be intent to cause alarm. The appeal was allowed, and the charges were dismissed.