PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT, CHANDIGARH. *** CWP NO. 5866 of 2008 Date of decision: August 18, 2009. *** National Campaign on Dalit Human Rights (Haryana Chapter) Versus The State of Haryana and others. *** CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice T.S.Thakur, CJ and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia. *** Present: Ms. Veena Kumari, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Randhir Singh,Addl: A.G.Haryana, for the respondents. *** T.S.Thakur, CJ (Oral) This petition has been filed in public interest. It prays for a mandamus directing the respondents to take effective measures for implementation of Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. It also prays for a direction to the respondents to establish special courts in each districts as contemplated by Section 14 of the said Act and to notify Public Prosecutors as Special Public Prosecutors for the conduct of cases before the Special Court. A prayer for a mandamus directing the respondents to take precautionary and preventive measures as provided under Rule 3 of the Act and to prepare a Contingency Plan for the implementation of the Act has also been made. In response to a notice issued by this Court, the respondents State of Haryana has filed a written statement on the affidavit of Rajender Singh Kadian, Deputy Director , Welfare of Scheduled Castes & Backward Classes Department, Haryana, Chandigarh. It is inter alia stated by the -2- CWP NO. 5866 of 2008 respondents in the said reply that the government have in terms of a notification dated January 30, 1990 designated the senior most Additional Sessions Judge at each district head-quarter in the State of Haryana as a Special Court to try offences under the aforementioned Act. It also refers to a notification issued by the Haryana Government, Administration of Justice Department, bearing No. 4/5/90-2JJ(1) dated January 30, 1990 whereby the Public Prosecutors posted in each Sessions Division in the State of Haryana have been designated as Special Public Prosecutor for conducting cases in the Special Courts as specified in Haryana Government,Administration of Justice Department notification No. 21/49/89-2JJ (ii) dated the 30th January, 1990. By another notification dated 7th December, 2006 the government of Haryana have published what is known as Haryana State Scheduled Castes (Prevention of Atrocities) Contingency plan for implementation of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The said plan provides immediate relief/assistance to the victims including ad hoc grant, travel allowance, daily maintenance expenses, diet money, medical facilities etc. In so far as specific cases to which the petitioner has made a reference, the respondents have in their reply given in tabulated form, the current status of each such case and urged that there is no neglect on the part of the respondents in implementing the provisions of the Act or giving necessary assistance to the victim belonging to SC & ST in the State of Haryana. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that while the State has designated the senior most Addl: Sessions Judge at the head-quarter as a Special Judge for trial of cases under the aforesaid Act and while the Public Prosecutors in each Sessions Division has been designated as Special Public Prosecutor for conducting the cases under the Special Act, -3- CWP NO. 5866 of 2008 a large number of cases under the said Act remain pending for a long period. In support of that submission, she drew our attention to Annexure P-7 to Cm No.11673-74 of 2009 in which the current status of as many as 10 cases under the Act has been indicated. She urged that although the said cases were registered and have been pending for the past more than four years and one case is pending for more than six years, the courts below have not taken adequate steps to ensure their speedy disposal. She urged that a direction to the respondents to expedite the completion of the trial and a corresponding direction to the courts concerned to dispose of the matters pending before them within a time frame, would serve the purpose. She further argued that the implementation of the provisions of the said Act leaves much to be desired on the part of the authorities concerned. A direction to the authorities to strictly comply with and implement the provision in letter and spirit would according to the learned counsel go a long way for an effective implementation of the provisions and also in preventing atrocities upon the less fortune sections of the society. Mr. Randhir Singh, counsel appearing for the State of Haryana submitted that the Government of Haryana have done every thing possible to ensure effective implementation of the provisions of the Act, 1989 and have designated Special Courts as also Special Public Prosecutors for a speedy disposal of the cases in the courts. He further submits that Contingency Plan, 2006 for helping the families belonging to the SC and ST has also been formulated and that help was being extended to the victims under that plan as and when the situation called for any such help. He further argued that in so far as the implementation of the Act is concerned, the State Government has done its best and would certainly take all such steps as may be necessary to ensure proper implementation of the provisions of the Act. In so far as the speedy disposal of the cases -4- CWP NO. 5866 of 2008 pending in the courts were concerned, Mr. Randhir Singh contended that a direction could be issued to the trial courts concerned to expedite the disposal of the matters and that the State would do every thing necessary that would help such early disposal. We have given our careful consideration to the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The State Government does appear to have put in place the necessary infrastructure to deal with crimes against the weaker Section of the society by notifying the special courts and Special Public Prosecutors and formulation of contingency plan, 2006 that would ensure speedy and meaningful assistance to the victims of any violence against such weaker sections. Having said so we must point out that the effectiveness of such measures depends largely on the will on the part of the officers who are charged with the duty of implementing the said measures effectively. The petitioner's complaint that cases are languishing in courts for years together may not be wholly incorrect yet the pendency of such cases may not be an indication of any neglect on the part of the state agency. A variety of factors contribute to the delay in the disposal of cases. We do not propose to go into the reasons that delay the disposal of such cases. All that we need say is that the special courts dealing with such cases ought to take special care to ensure speedy and early disposal of all the case pending before them. This would help build confidence among the weaker sections of the society that the provisions of the Act are not meant only for doing lip service to the cause of the poor and down trodden but are effective in the true sense. So also the state authorities would do well to issue instructions to all concerned to ensure that when ever complaints under the Act are received proper attention is given to them and wherever found necessary, cases are registered, investigation completed and challans filed before the Court concerned without forcing the victims to -5- CWP NO. 5866 of 2008 resort to other means for redressal of their grievances. Having said that we see no reason to continue these proceedings with us any longer. In our opinion, the petition can be disposed off with the following directions:- i) the designated courts established under the Act shall take steps for the early disposal of the cases pending before them under the SC & ST Act, 1989; ii) the State authorities shall co-operate in the process of early disposal of such cases and issue instructions to the Special Public Prosecutors and to the investigating agency. iii)the state government shall take such measures as may be considered necessary for more effective enforcement of the provisions of SC & ST Act to ensure that the victims of any violence or other atrocities, are not made to suffer. iv) The petitioner shall have the liberty to point out in a fresh petition any further directions that may be called for in any specific case or a class of cases brought up for consideration. This petition is with the above directions disposed off. No costs. (T.S.Thakur) Chief Justice August 18, 2009 (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Malik Judge