SC orders independent probe into social boycott of Dalits in Haryana village

The Supreme Court has ordered an independent probe by two former DGPs of Uttar Pradesh into allegations of social boycott of Dalits by a ‘dominant community’ at a village in Hisar district of Haryana.

Satya Prakash

“We request Shri Vikram Chand Goyal, former DGP, 1975 UP, and Mr Kamlendra Prasad, former DGP, 1981 UP, to make an independent investigation on the prevailing situation and file a status report before this court so as to enable us to proceed further in this case,” a Bench led by Justice MM Sundresh ordered on October 16.

The Bench directed the two former DGPs to file a status report in three months, indicating not only the present situation but also the measures, if any, needed to be taken in connection with the allegations of social boycott of Dalits levelled in 2017.

“We make it clear that there is no bar for the pending trial to proceed,” said the Bench, which also included Justice Aravind Kumar.

The Bench was informed that no untoward incident had taken place in recent times and “normalcy” was prevailing. It was also apprised of the fact that a chargesheet was filed on August 20, 2017, even as no arrests were made.

Renewal of Kartarpur corridor agreement ‘significant’ for honouring spiritual aspirations of Sikhs: Nadda

The Haryana Police gave a clean chit to six of seven accused persons and were not named in the chargesheet.

In 2017, a group of Dalit boys was allegedly assaulted by members of a ‘dominant community’ over the use of a hand-pump. An FIR was lodged after six persons were injured and hospitalised.

The top court was told that members of the dominant community, who were hostile to the Dalits, were made prosecution witnesses and not a single Scheduled Caste certificate of the 28 complaints/victims of social boycott was taken by the police and submitted along with the chargesheet to the court.

Also, videos given to the police by the victims, showing the call of the social boycott by the dominant community in a public meeting, was not mentioned in the chargesheet or produced in court, and the sanction for prosecution under Sections 153A and 505, IPC, was taken belatedly after the issue was raised by the complainants, the court was told.

Courtesy : Tribune India

Note: This news is originally published in tribuneindia.com and was used solely for non-profit/non-commercial purposes exclusively for Human Rights