# Calcutta, Bombay High Courts widen SC/ST Act to digital public view

2026-10-02T08:51:21+00:00 | Governance | Indian Opinion Desk

Corroboration: 2 independent outlets

The Calcutta High Court on Wednesday, 30 September, ruled that casteist slurs on social media can attract the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, holding that ‘public view’ under the law extends to the digital domain. Justice Uday Kumar said the requirement under Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) ‘transcends physical space into the digital domain’, setting aside a lower court order that had rejected a complaint over Facebook posts. Separately, the Bombay High Court on Friday, 2 October, denied anticipatory bail to a man accused of circulating objectionable videos of a Scheduled Caste woman via WhatsApp, ruling that such circulation falls within ‘public view’. Justice Y.G. Khobragade held that the statutory bar under Section 18 of the Act applied, and noted the accused had remained absconding. Both rulings expand the interpretation of ‘public view’ beyond physical spaces to social media and messaging platforms.

## Indian Opinion Analysis

The Calcutta and Bombay High Court rulings both expand ‘public view’ under the SC/ST Act to digital platforms, but differ in context. The Indian Express report on the Calcutta judgment is a neutral, detailed legal analysis, noting a recent Supreme Court caution that not every caste remark triggers the Act. The Verdictum report on the Bombay judgment is also neutral-report, focusing on the bail denial and the accused’s absconding status. Neither outlet adopts a pro-government or critical stance, both are straight legal reporting. The combined effect is a clear judicial trend toward treating online caste abuse as an offence in public view, with the next test likely in the Supreme Court if these rulings are challenged. The Calcutta ruling explicitly references the Supreme Court’s August 2026 decision in Ramkrishna Chauhan, which narrowed the physical-space requirement.

## Coverage

Coverage: 2 sources, 2 neutral
- indianexpress.com (neutral report) <https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/explained-law/sc-st-act-social-media-casteist-slurs-calcutta-hc-10900054/>
  Detailed legal analysis of ruling, no editorial slant
- verdictum.in (neutral report) <https://www.verdictum.in/bombay-high-court/nikhil-v-state-of-maharashtra-anr2026bhc-nag13009-social-media-public-view-sc-st-act-1623161>
  Straight reporting of bail judgment and facts

This brief was synthesised by AI from the 2 sources linked above, so one read covers every framing they carry.

Tags: Bombay High Court, Calcutta High Court, SC/ST Act, Supreme Court
Canonical: https://indianopinion.org/calcutta-bombay-high-courts-widen-sc-st-act-to-digital-public-view/
License: Summary and commentary (c) Indian Opinion, reusable with attribution. Facts belong to the linked sources.
Cite: https://indianopinion.org/calcutta-bombay-high-courts-widen-sc-st-act-to-digital-public-view/#story-in-brief

How this brief was made: an AI model read the reports linked above and wrote this summary and analysis, which were published automatically. Published briefs are sampled every hour by an automated quality check; the editor verifies its findings and approves corrections, and corrected briefs carry a dated correction line. Stance labels are editorial classifications of how each outlet framed this story, assigned by the same model, not ratings of the outlets. We do no original reporting. Methodology: https://indianopinion.org/ai-use-policy/