Home  /  Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989  /  Section 22

Section 22: Protection of action taken in good faith

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

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 22

Section 22 establishes statutory immunity protecting Central and State Governments, public servants, and authorized persons from civil suits, criminal prosecutions, and legal proceedings for actions done or intended to be done in good faith in pursuance of the Act.

  • Comprehensive Statutory Immunity from Legal Proceedings: Explicitly bars any suit, prosecution, or legal proceeding against the Central Government, State Government, or any officer, authority, or person for any action taken or intended to be done in good faith under the Act, rules, or schemes.
  • Substantive Meaning of 'Good Faith': Good faith is interpreted strictly in accordance with Section 52 of the IPC [now Section 2(11) of the BNS, 2023] and Section 3(22) of the General Clauses Act, 1897: an act is done in good faith only if done with due care, caution, and reasonable diligence.
  • Limits of Immunity: Malice and Dereliction Excluded: Immunity does not protect intentional dereliction of duty (punishable under Section 4 of the Act), fabricated or malicious investigations, deliberate falsification of case diaries, or corrupt refusal to register FIRs. Good faith cannot be invoked as a defense for ultra vires or bad-faith actions.
Key Landmark Precedents:
  • Army Headquarters v. CBI (2012) 6 SCC 228: The Supreme Court held that statutory immunity clauses protecting actions taken in 'good faith' require a demonstrable showing that the public officer acted within the scope of lawful authority and exercised reasonable care and attention. Bad faith or gross recklessness strips the officer of immunity.
  • State of Maharashtra v. B.K. Takkamore AIR 1967 SC 1353: Reaffirmed that protection of action in good faith cannot be claimed as a cloak for actions taken with malice in law, improper motives, or total disregard of mandatory statutory procedures.
  • Dr. Subhash Kashinath Mahajan v. State of Maharashtra (2018) 6 SCC 454: Addressed the protection of public servants from vexatious prosecution when performing official duties, holding that bona fide administrative decisions (such as adverse confidential report entries) do not constitute atrocities unless motivated by caste bias.
Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:

When an accused attempts to file a retaliatory private complaint or malicious prosecution suit against a police officer or Special Public Prosecutor for investigating or prosecuting an atrocity, invoke Section 22 to have the proceedings quashed in limine under Section 482 CrPC / Section 528 BNSS. Conversely, if prosecuting a public servant under Section 4 for willful neglect of duty, establish through documentary evidence that the officer's omission was deliberate and reckless, thereby defeating the defense of 'good faith' under Section 22.

Section 21 All 23 Sections of Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 Section 23