Home  /  Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989  /  Section 9

Section 9: Conferment of powers

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 8 All 23 Sections of Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 Section 10

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 9

Section 9 contains an expansive non-obstante clause empowering the State Government to confer police powers—specifically arrest, investigation, and prosecution before a Special Court—upon designated State officers for preventing and coping with atrocities, operating in direct statutory conjunction with Rule 7 of the SC/ST Rules, 1995.

  • Overriding Non-Obstante Power to Confer Police Powers (Section 9(1)): Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or other provisions of the Act, the State Government may, by Official Gazette notification, confer on any State officer the powers of a police officer, including arrest, investigation, and prosecution, for any district, class, or group of atrocity cases.
  • Mandatory Interplay with Rule 7 of the 1995 Rules: While Rule 7(1) of the SC/ST Rules mandates that investigations under the Act be conducted by a police officer not below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP / ACP), Section 9 provides the sole statutory mechanism through which the State Government can specially authorize other designated officers to conduct investigations.
  • Statutory Duty of Inter-Agency Assistance (Section 9(2)): Mandates that all police officers and all other officers of the Government shall assist the specially designated officer in executing the provisions of the Act, rules, or schemes, creating a legally binding obligation of inter-departmental cooperation.
  • Application of Code of Criminal Procedure / BNSS (Section 9(3)): The exercise of investigative and prosecutorial powers by designated officers remains subject to the procedural safeguards, search protocols, and remand rules prescribed by the CrPC / BNSS, preserving fundamental constitutional rights.
Key Landmark Precedents:
  • State of M.P. v. Chunnilal @ Chunna (2009) 12 SCC 649: The Supreme Court held that the provisions of Rule 7 of the 1995 Rules are mandatory. An investigation conducted by an officer below the rank of DSP without a specific notification issued by the State Government under Section 9 is wholly without jurisdiction and vitiates the trial if prejudice is caused to the accused.
  • State of Punjab v. Hardial Singh (2009) 15 SCC 106: Reaffirmed that an Assistant Sub-Inspector or Sub-Inspector cannot investigate an offence under the SC/ST Act unless a specific statutory notification under Section 9 has been published by the State Government in the Official Gazette conferring such powers.
  • Union of India v. State of Maharashtra (2020) 4 SCC 761: The three-judge review bench reiterated that the specialized investigative hierarchy under Section 9 read with Rule 7 was consciously crafted by Parliament to prevent biased or incompetent inquiries into sensitive caste atrocities.
Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:

In every trial and Section 482 / 528 petition, check the rank of the Investigating Officer on the charge sheet immediately. If the FIR was investigated by a Sub-Inspector, Head Constable, or Inspector, call for the Official Gazette notification under Section 9(1). In the absence of a published Section 9 notification specifically vesting investigation powers in that officer, raise Chunnilal and Hardial Singh at the stage of framing charges to seek discharge or quashing for lack of statutory jurisdiction.

Section 8 All 23 Sections of Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 Section 10