MADURAI: The Madurai rural district police have registered a case against six individuals under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (SC/ST) Prevention of Atrocities (POA) Act for allegedly assaulting a 17-year-old Dalit boy, subjecting him to casteist slurs, and forcing him to fall at their feet over a prior dispute. The boy also alleged that one of the accused urinated on him in the presence of a six-year-old child.
The incident occurred on January 16 in Sangampatti village. Following the victim’s complaint, the Usilampatti Town police on Saturday charged the accused under multiple provisions of the SC/ST POA Act, including Sections 296(b), 351(2) BNS read with 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s), which address criminal intimidation, obscenity, and deliberate humiliation of individuals from SC/ST communities.
The Neelam Cultural Centre, an NGO advocating Dalit rights, strongly condemned the incident and criticized the delay in police action. The NGO shared details on social platform X, alleging that the accused had not been arrested as of Sunday. The victim, accompanied by members of the Viduthalai Chiruthaigal Katchi (VCK) and an advocate, approached the office of the Usilampatti Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) on Saturday to push for action.
In a video statement, the victim recounted his ordeal:
“Last month, during a village festival, I was harassed and threatened by a group of individuals due to my caste. They also insulted my family. I left for Kerala out of fear but returned home for Pongal. Despite staying low, the accused forcibly took me to a secluded spot in the village.”
He added, “They beat me while hurling casteist slurs and forced me to fall at their feet, demanding an apology even though I had done nothing wrong. One of them urinated on me in front of a child. They also threatened to kill me. I sustained serious injuries from the attack and required hospital treatment.”
Madurai Superintendent of Police (SP) BK Arvind stated on Sunday that an investigation was underway and emphasized that police had taken swift action. However, the police denied the victim’s claim of being urinated on, asserting that misinformation about the case was being circulated.
