Home  /  Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989  /  Section 13

Section 13: Penalty for non-compliance of order under section 10

Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 • Official Statutory Text & Practice Guide

Statutory Regulation
Legal Standard
Competent Court / Tribunal
Act 1989
Section 12 All 23 Sections of Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 Section 14

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 13

Section 13 establishes an autonomous substantive penal offence punishing the contravention or defiance of an externment order issued under Section 10, prescribing imprisonment of up to one year, fine, or both, operating concurrently with coercive custodial eviction under Section 11.

  • Autonomous Substantive Offence of Contravening Externment: Section 13 criminalizes the intentional or willful contravention of any order passed by the Special Court under Section 10, including failure to leave the designated area within the prescribed period or unauthorized return.
  • Statutory Penal Sanction: Prescribes a maximum punishment of imprisonment for a term extending up to one year, or with fine, or with both. The offence is cognizable, non-bailable, and triable exclusively by the Special Court.
  • Independent Liability Concurrent with Administrative Eviction: Prosecution and punishment under Section 13 operate concurrently with the physical removal of the contravener under Section 11(1). Custodial eviction does not bar criminal conviction, nor does criminal conviction extinguish the underlying externment.
Key Landmark Precedents:
  • Sanjay alias Bablu v. State of Haryana (2014) 15 SCC 387: The Supreme Court held that willful disobedience of lawful preventive orders issued by judicial authorities constitutes a serious threat to public order and the rule of law, requiring strict punitive enforcement.
  • Babulal Parate v. State of Maharashtra AIR 1961 SC 884: Upheld the constitutionality of penalizing violations of lawful preventive and prohibitory orders, affirming that preventive jurisprudence relies on penal teeth to ensure community peace.
  • State of Maharashtra v. Anant Ramchandra (1990) 2 SCC 419: Established that in a prosecution for contravention of an externment order, the prosecution must strictly prove service of the order, clarity of the specified boundaries, and unauthorized physical presence of the accused within the restricted zone.
Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:

In defending an accused charged under Section 13, the primary defenses are: (1) lack of personal service or non-communication of the Section 10 order and its grounds; (2) ambiguous geographic boundaries in the externment order creating a genuine mistake of fact under Section 79 IPC / Section 17 BNS; or (3) that the presence in the area was compelled by an act of God, medical emergency, or compliance with a judicial summons (which negates mens rea).

Section 12 All 23 Sections of Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 Section 14