Casteist remark even on Facebook or other social media can fall under SC/ST Act: HC

The Calcutta High Court has said that caste-based abuse posted on social media can come within the scope of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, observing that the idea of “public view” is not restricted to physical spaces. The court made the observation while ordering a fresh investigation into a complaint filed by a Behala resident who alleged that he was targeted with casteist remarks in Facebook posts, a TOI report stated.

Justice Uday Kumar, in an order dated September 25, said the concept of public view can extend to the “digital domain” when offences covered under Section 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act are alleged. These provisions deal with intentional insults, intimidation and caste-based abuse against members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes when such conduct takes place in public view.

Police closure report questioned

The case dates back to September 2022, when the complainant approached Behala police alleging that two people had posted abusive comments on Facebook targeting his caste, religion and family. Police collected screenshots and digital links and also recorded statements from independent witnesses. However, investigators later submitted a “Final Report True, No Clue” report, saying they could not identify the social media users involved.


According to the police, efforts were made through the cybercrime unit to obtain information from Facebook, but the platform did not provide the required user details. The complainant challenged the closure through a “na-raji” petition, essentially a protest against the police final report. The lower court rejected the petition and accepted the police report in June 2023.

HC says more investigation should have been done

The High Court was critical of the manner in which the investigation was brought to an end. The court said that the inability to obtain information from the social media platform did not, by itself, justify treating the case as having no clue. It pointed to the possibility of further cyber-forensic investigation by a specialised CID unit and the use of procedures such as IP-log tracking.

The judge also criticised the lower court for not directing a further investigation by a senior police officer. The order noted that treating the absence of user information from the platform as the end of the investigation resulted in a serious failure of the judicial process.

‘Public view’ can extend to digital platforms

One of the key observations in the case concerns how the law should apply to caste-based abuse posted online. The court held that public view under the relevant provisions of the SC/ST Act can extend beyond a physical location. In the context of social media, a post can potentially be viewed by members of the public even though the alleged offence takes place through a digital platform.

The observation does not mean that every offensive social media post automatically amounts to an offence under the SC/ST Act. The specific statutory requirements and evidence in each case would still have to be examined.

Court rejects reasoning based on other cases

The High Court also questioned the lower court's reasoning for accepting the police closure report. The lower court had noted that the complainant had filed three other cases in which charge sheets were submitted, and used that circumstance while dealing with the present case.

The High Court said each alleged criminal incident has to be examined independently, based on its own facts and evidence. The matter has now been sent back for further investigation, meaning the allegations will be examined again rather than being treated as closed because the identities of the Facebook users could not initially be established.