The record
Written from the 1 report below. Nothing here is unsourced.
- The Supreme Court refused to hear a petition challenging amendments made to the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act in 2015 and 2018.
- These changes had expanded the scope of recognized atrocities and streamlined trial processes for victims and witnesses.
- The amendments specifically reversed a previous court ruling that had mandated preliminary inquiries before arrests.
- The legal challenge argued that the provisions fostered reverse discrimination and were arbitrary.
Who said what2
Only words found exactly in the article are shown, attributed and linked to the line they came from.
Brijbhushan Saini
2 quotes · 1 outlet
“There can be no presumption against non-SC/ST persons that they have committed the offence as mentioned in the complaint, as such allegations may be based on personal vendetta, political rivalry or to extort money”
In the article
…which had introduced preliminary inquiries and prior approvals before making arrests under the Act. The 2018 amendment law had done away with these requirements and restored the strict provisions of the original Act. “ There can be no presumption against non-SC/ST persons that they have committed the offence as mentioned in the complaint, as such allegations may be based on personal vendetta, political rivalry or to extort money ,” the petitioner, Brijbhushan Saini, said. He argued that the amendments had introduced provisions which were “manifestly arbitrary, draconian, and disproportionate, creating a parallel caste-based criminal justice…
“manifestly arbitrary, draconian, and disproportionate, creating a parallel caste-based criminal justice system that presumes guilt based solely on the accused’s non-SC/ST status, thereby fostering reverse discrimination, misuse, and erosion of the rule of law”
In the article
…the complaint, as such allegations may be based on personal vendetta, political rivalry or to extort money,” the petitioner, Brijbhushan Saini, said. He argued that the amendments had introduced provisions which were “ manifestly arbitrary, draconian, and disproportionate, creating a parallel caste-based criminal justice system that presumes guilt based solely on the accused’s non-SC/ST status, thereby fostering reverse discrimination, misuse, and erosion of the rule of law ”. Published - September 22, 2026 05:48 pm IST…
Coverage1
All filed from India
Named India · Brijbhushan Saini · Supreme Court
The 1 report is listed beside the record.
Ask this story
Answers cite the reports above, or say they can't.