Amendment History of the SC/ST Act: 2014 Ordinance, 2015 and 2018 Amendments

The SC/ST Act has been amended twice in substance. The 2015 Amendment Act (Act 1 of 2016, in force from 26 January 2016) rewrote most of the Act: it recast the offences, added a Schedule of general offences, detailed the duties of public servants, created Exclusive Special Courts, introduced a special appeal provision and gave victims and witnesses a chapter of rights. The 2018 Amendment Act (Act 27 of 2018) was narrower but politically charged: it inserted Section 18A to undo the Supreme Court's guidelines in Subhash Kashinath Mahajan. This note traces the full history from the original 1989 Act through the lapsed 2014 Ordinance to both amendments, explains every major change, and ends with before-and-after comparisons.

Figure 1: Amendment history at a glance

1. The Original SC/ST Act, 1989

• Structure. Twenty-three sections in five chapters: Preliminary; Offences of Atrocities; Externment; Special Courts; Miscellaneous. There was no chapter on victims and no Schedule.
• Offences. Section 3(1) listed fifteen clauses, (i) to (xv), each punishable with six months to five years and fine: forcing inedible substances, dumping excreta or carcasses, parading naked or painting the face, wrongful occupation and dispossession of land, begar, interference with voting, false legal proceedings, false information to a public servant, intentional insult or intimidation in public view, outraging the modesty of a woman, sexual exploitation, fouling water, denying passage, and forcing a person to leave his home or village.
• Graver offences. Section 3(2)(i) to (vii), including clause (v): any IPC offence punishable with ten years or more committed against a person or property 'on the ground that' the person was a member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, punishable with imprisonment for life.
• Public servants. Section 4 punished a public servant who 'wilfully neglects his duties' under the Act, without listing what those duties were.
• Courts. Section 14 required the State Government, with the concurrence of the Chief Justice of the High Court, to specify a Court of Session in each district as a Special Court.
• Rules. The 1995 Rules provided for investigation by a Deputy Superintendent of Police, relief to victims and monitoring committees.

Over two decades, implementation fell short. The Parliamentary Standing Committee that examined the 2014 Bill recorded non-registration of cases, delays in investigation, arrest and charge-sheeting, long trials, high acquittal rates and poor coordination between enforcement agencies. Cases registered under the Act rose from 38,449 in 2010 to 46,114 in 2013, while pendency in courts rose from 79.1 per cent to 84.1 per cent. New forms of humiliation, such as social boycott and tonsuring, were also not clearly covered.

2. The Amendment Ordinance, 2014

• Promulgation. The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Ordinance, 2014 was promulgated on 4 March 2014 under Article 123, while Parliament was not in session.
• Lapse. Under Article 123(2), an Ordinance ceases to operate six weeks after Parliament reassembles unless replaced by an Act. Parliament reassembled in June 2014 after the general election, and the Ordinance lapsed in July 2014.
• Replacement Bill. A Bill in the same terms was introduced in the Lok Sabha in July 2014 and referred to the Standing Committee on Social Justice and Empowerment, which reported on 19 December 2014.
• Passage. The Bill was passed by the Lok Sabha on 4 August 2015 and by the Rajya Sabha on 21 December 2015.
• Repeal and saving. Section 13 of the 2015 Act formally repealed the 2014 Ordinance and provided that anything done under the principal Act as amended by the Ordinance would be deemed done under the Act as amended by the 2015 Act.

3. The Amendment Act, 2015: Enactment and Objects

• Name and number. The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 (Act 1 of 2016), assented to on 31 December 2015.
• Commencement: 26 January 2016. Section 1(2) left commencement to a Central Government notification; the amendments came into force on Republic Day, 26 January 2016. The Rules were amended soon after, on 14 April 2016.
• Objects. To define new forms of atrocity; to make public servants accountable by specifying their duties; to ensure speedy trial through Exclusive Special Courts, direct cognizance and time limits; to protect and involve victims and witnesses; to presume knowledge of caste identity in appropriate cases; and to widen the reach of the Act to general offences listed in a Schedule.

Figure 2: What the 2015 Amendment Act changed, section by section

4. Expansion of the Definition Clause

Section 3 of the Amendment Act inserted ten new clauses in Section 2(1): dependent (bb), economic boycott (bc), Exclusive Special Court (bd), forest rights (be), manual scavenger (bf), public servant (bg), Schedule (ea), social boycott (eb), victim (ec) and witness (ed). It also substituted clause (f), which borrows the meanings of undefined words from the IPC, the Evidence Act and the CrPC. The definitions of victim and witness are the foundation of Chapter IVA, and those of economic and social boycott support the new boycott offence in Section 3(1)(zc). Each is discussed in Topic 12.

5. Expansion of Atrocity Offences under Section 3

The Amendment Act substituted Section 3(1) with twenty-nine clauses, (a) to (zc). Some recast the fifteen original clauses; many were new.

• Carried forward and recast. Obnoxious substances (a); parading naked, removing clothes and painting the face or body (parts of (d) and (e)); dumping excreta or carcasses (b), (c); wrongful occupation and dispossession of land (f), (g), now expressly including interference with forest rights, water and irrigation facilities; begar and bonded labour (h); interference with voting (l); false proceedings (p) and false information (q); insult or intimidation in public view (r); fouling water (x); denying passage (y); forcing a person to leave home or village (z).
• New forms of degradation. Garlanding with footwear (d); tonsuring of head and removing moustaches (e); compelling a person to dispose of carcasses or dig graves (i); manual scavenging (j); dedicating a woman as a devadasi (k).
• New political offences. Obstructing a candidate or proposer (l); obstructing a panchayat or municipal office-holder (m); post-poll violence and boycott (n); an offence committed because the victim voted or did not vote for a candidate (o).
• New speech and dignity offences. Abuse by caste name in public view (s); damaging objects held sacred (t); promoting enmity or hatred (u); disrespecting a deceased person held in high esteem (v).
• Sexual offences reframed. Intentional sexual touching without consent, and sexual words, acts or gestures, knowing the woman belongs to a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe (w), with consent defined in an Explanation.
• Exclusion and boycott. Obstruction in the use of common property resources, burial grounds, roads, transport, footwear, new clothes, wedding processions, places of worship, institutions and occupations (za); harm on allegations of witchcraft (zb); social or economic boycott (zc).

5.1 Change in Section 3(2)(v)

The original clause required that the IPC offence be committed 'on the ground that' the victim was a member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe. Courts read this as requiring caste to be a reason for the offence, which was hard to prove (Masumsha Hasanasha Musalman, 2000). The amendment replaced those words with 'knowing that': it is now enough that the accused knew of the victim's identity (Patan Jamal Vali v. State of A.P., 2021, noting the change).

5.2 Insertion of Section 3(2)(va) and the Schedule

Before 2016, a less serious IPC offence (hurt, wrongful restraint, criminal intimidation, stalking) committed against a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe member was outside the Act unless it also fell within a Section 3(1) clause. The new clause (va) covers any offence specified in the Schedule, committed against a person or property knowing that the person is a member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, and punishes it with the punishment provided under the IPC for that offence, the offender also being liable to fine. The Schedule lists thirty-two IPC sections, from criminal conspiracy and rioting to hurt, acid attack, offences against women, kidnapping and criminal intimidation (see Topic 11).

6. Expansion of Public-Servant Duties under Section 4

The Amendment Act substituted Section 4. The punishment for a public servant (not being a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe member) who wilfully neglects his duties remains six months to one year, but the duties are now listed in Section 4(2): reading out the information given orally before taking the informant's signature; registering the complaint or FIR under the appropriate sections of the Act; furnishing a copy forthwith to the informant; recording the statements of victims and witnesses; conducting the investigation and filing a charge-sheet in the Special Court within sixty days, explaining any delay in writing; correctly preparing, framing and translating documents; and performing any other duty under the Act or Rules. Charges are to be booked on the recommendation of an administrative enquiry, and under Section 4(3) the Special Court takes cognizance of the dereliction and directs penal proceedings.

7. Exclusive Special Courts, Direct Cognizance and Appeals

• Exclusive Special Courts (s.14(1)). For speedy trial, the State Government, with the concurrence of the Chief Justice of the High Court, must establish an Exclusive Special Court for one or more districts. In districts with fewer cases, a Court of Session may instead be specified as a Special Court.
• Direct cognizance (second proviso to s.14(1)). Special Courts and Exclusive Special Courts have power to take cognizance of offences under the Act directly, reversing the effect of Gangula Ashok v. State of A.P. (2000), which had required committal.
• Adequate courts (s.14(2)). The State must establish enough courts to dispose of cases within two months, as far as possible.
• Day-to-day trial (s.14(3)). Proceedings continue from day to day until all the witnesses in attendance have been examined, unless the court records reasons for adjourning beyond the following day, and the trial is to be completed, as far as possible, within two months of the charge-sheet.
• Appeals (s.14A). An appeal lies to the High Court on facts and law from any judgment, sentence or order (other than interlocutory) of a Special or Exclusive Special Court, and, notwithstanding Section 378(3) CrPC, against orders granting or refusing bail. The limitation is ninety days, extendable for sufficient cause but not beyond one hundred and eighty days, and appeals are to be disposed of within three months of admission as far as possible.
• Prosecutors (s.15). A Special Public Prosecutor for every Special Court and an Exclusive Special Public Prosecutor for every Exclusive Special Court, the State specifying a Public Prosecutor (for a Special Court) or an Exclusive Special Public Prosecutor (for an Exclusive Special Court), or appointing an advocate of at least seven years' practice.

8. Section 15A: Rights of Victims and Witnesses

The new Chapter IVA is the most significant addition of 2016. Section 15A makes it the State's duty to protect victims, their dependants and witnesses; requires victims to be treated with fairness, respect and dignity; gives the victim or dependant a right to timely notice of every court proceeding including bail, a right to apply for summoning of documents and witnesses, and a right to be heard on bail, discharge, release, parole, conviction and sentence; empowers the court to conceal witnesses' identities and act on complaints of harassment; requires all proceedings relating to offences under the Act to be video recorded; directs the State to frame a scheme of rights and entitlements (including a free copy of the FIR); and recognises the right of victims to take the assistance of NGOs, social workers or advocates. The Supreme Court has held the notice and hearing requirements mandatory (Hariram Bhambhi v. Satyanarayan, 2021).

9. The 2015 Amendment, Speedy Trial and Relief

• Speedy trial. Sixty-day charge-sheet (s.4(2)(e)); Exclusive Special Courts; direct cognizance; day-to-day trial with a two-month target (s.14(3)); ninety-day appeals decided within three months (s.14A).
• Relief and rehabilitation. Section 15A(6) and (11) require travelling and maintenance expenses, socio-economic rehabilitation and relocation where needed. The 1995 Rules were amended on 14 April 2016 to revise the schedule of relief (now ranging from ₹85,000 to ₹8,25,000 according to the offence) and to tie payments to stages of the case.
• Externment. Section 10 now also covers atrocity-prone areas identified under Section 21(2)(vii), and the maximum period rose from two to three years.

10. The 2015 Amendment and the Presumption of Caste Knowledge

Because many offences now turn on knowledge ('knowing that'), the presumption is central. It is rebuttable, and it is triggered only by proof of personal acquaintance with the victim or the family. The same amendment widened Section 8(a): a person who renders financial assistance 'in relation to the offences committed by' a person accused or reasonably suspected of an offence under this Chapter is presumed to have abetted it.

11. The Amendment Act, 2018

11.1 Background: Subhash Kashinath Mahajan

11.2 The legislative response

• Passage and commencement. The Amendment Bill was passed by the Lok Sabha on 6 August 2018 and the Rajya Sabha on 9 August 2018; the Act (Act 27 of 2018) received assent on 17 August 2018 and came into force on 20 August 2018.
• Single change. It inserted Section 18A, overruling the Mahajan guidelines by statute.

• No preliminary enquiry (s.18A(1)(a)). Registration of an FIR cannot be delayed for a preliminary enquiry, consistent with Lalita Kumari v. Government of U.P. (2014), which requires registration where information discloses a cognizable offence.
• No prior approval (s.18A(1)(b)). The investigating officer may arrest, if necessary, without approval, and no procedure other than the Act and the Code applies. Arrest remains subject to the general law on necessity of arrest.
• Bar on anticipatory bail restored (s.18A(2)). Section 18 already excluded Section 438; clause (2) repeats the exclusion with the words 'notwithstanding any judgment or order or direction of any Court', aimed directly at Mahajan. The reference to Section 438 CrPC is now read as Section 482 BNSS.

11.3 Review and constitutional validity

Later decisions have applied this balance: Shajan Skaria v. State of Kerala (2024) allowed anticipatory bail where the ingredients were not disclosed, and Kiran v. Rajkumar Jivraj Jain (2025) set aside anticipatory bail where they were.

12. Before and After: the Two Amendments Compared

Figure 3: The Act before and after the 2015 Amendment

Figure 4: The 2018 cycle: Court, Parliament, Court

Figure 5: Arrest and bail: the law after Mahajan and after Section 18A

13. Quick Revision and Memory Aids

• '4-3-14 Ordinance, lapsed in July'. The 2014 Ordinance was never converted; Section 13 of the 2015 Act repealed it and saved actions.
• '2015 Act, 2016 number, Republic Day start'. Act 1 of 2016, assent 31 December 2015, in force 26 January 2016.
• '15 became 29'. Section 3(1) clauses: (i) to (xv) became (a) to (zc).
• 'Ground became knowing'. Section 3(2)(v).
• 'va plus 32'. Section 3(2)(va) and the thirty-two IPC sections in the Schedule.
• 'Read, register, copy, record, 60 days, translate'. The Section 4(2) duties.
• 'Exclusive, direct, daily, 2 and 3'. Exclusive Special Courts, direct cognizance, day-to-day trial, two-month trial, three-month appeal.
• '90, max 180'. Limitation for appeals under Section 14A.
• 'Knew the family, knew the caste'. Section 8(c) presumption (Shivkumar, 2025).
• 'M-R-C'. Mahajan (20 March 2018), Review (1 October 2019), Chauhan (10 February 2020); Act 27 of 2018 in between (in force 20 August 2018).

14. Frequently Asked Questions

When did the 2015 Amendment come into force?

On 26 January 2016. The Act (Act 1 of 2016) received assent on 31 December 2015 and was brought into force by notification.

What happened to the 2014 Ordinance?

It lapsed in July 2014 because it was not replaced within six weeks of Parliament's reassembly. The replacement Bill became the 2015 Amendment Act, whose Section 13 repealed the Ordinance and saved actions taken under it.

What was the effect of the 2015 change to Section 3(2)(v)?

It replaced 'on the ground that' with 'knowing that', so the prosecution need only prove the accused's knowledge of the victim's caste or tribal identity, not that caste was the reason for the offence.

Why was Section 18A inserted?

To nullify the Mahajan guidelines of March 2018, which had required a preliminary enquiry and approval before arrest and had diluted the bar on anticipatory bail.

Is Section 18A constitutional?

Yes. Prathvi Raj Chauhan v. Union of India (2020) upheld it, clarifying that the bar applies only where a prima facie case under the Act is disclosed.

15. Related Topics and Provisions

• Topic 1: Introduction, Object and Scope. The Section 18 case law from Balothia to Kiran.
• Topic 11: Structure of the Act. Every section after both amendments.
• Topic 12: Section 2 Definitions. The ten definitions added in 2016.
• Amendment Act, 2015 (Act 1 of 2016); Amendment Act, 2018 (Act 27 of 2018). The two amending statutes.
• Article 123. Ordinances and their lapse.