The Congress and the BJP on Tuesday exchanged verbal blows on the Supreme Court order regarding the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, with the former asserting that the Centre “actively aided” the dilution of the law.

A day after eight people were reportedly killed as widespread agitations against the SC order swept across many States, BJP President Amit Shah released a series of tweets accusing the Congress of playing “negative politics”. Responding to Congress President Rahul Gandhi’s barb that keeping Dalits at the bottom of the social pyramid is “in the DNA” of the BJP, Shah said the Congress had deliberately sidelined Dr BR Ambedkar.

“The Congress, which is mocking the DNA of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, is the same party which defeated Dr Ambedkar not once but twice, made flimsy excuses to ensure that his portrait was not placed in the Central Hall, denied him a Bharat Ratna. India has seen through their negative politics,” said Shah.

Congress leader Anand Sharma said Shah is “ignorant of history” and is the ideological descendent of an organisation that “not only openly colluded with the British to oppose Mahatma Gandhi and the freedom movement but was opposed to the social vision of Dr Ambedkar and the Constitution”.

“Amit Shah should educate himself. It was the Congress that vacated seats not once but twice to ensure that Dr Ambedkar was a member of the Constituent Assembly and the Law Minister subsequently. He should read what Dr Ambedkar has said about the Congress and Pandit Nehru’s dedication and discipline in aiding him in the framing of the Constitution. They are a party specialising in distorting history and facts,” said Sharma.

Sharma and the Congress media in-charge Randeep Singh Surjewala accused Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad of “misrepresenting and hiding the fact that the Centre aided the dilution of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act”.

“Yesterday, the Law Minister is on record saying that the Government of India was not a party to this case. He has made a factually incorrect statement. He should withdraw and apologise. It is a matter of concern that the Law Minister is either ignorant or is deliberately misleading the nation on their collusion to dilute this important law. The government, in fact, opened the window for allowing anticipatory bail. The government is a willing party to what has happened,” said Sharma.

Surjewala demanded to know how the Law Minister was saying the Centre was not a party when, on November 20, 2017, the Supreme Court issued notices to the Attorney General of India as the issue involved a Central statute.

“They were sent notices but Prime Minister Narendra Modi did not deem it fit to depute either the Attorney General or the Solicitor General to argue to protect the law. He sent an Additional Solicitor General. On January 31, 2017, the Centre took time to file a reply. How do you seek time when you are not a party? The Law Minister is not telling the truth. In fact, when this matter came before the court, the law officer of the Centre said anticipatory bail should be given if there is no prima facie case. The Centre has given an affidavit including an order if a case involving Dalit is found to be wrong, he can be punished. They attached a circular dated March 19, 2015, which said that relevant sections of the IPC should be invoked if a complaint under this Act is found to be wrong. The SC judgement, in para 30-31, noted the Centre’s submission. How can the Law Minister say the Centre was not involved? They aided the dilution of the Act,” said Surjewala.

Related Topics
comment COMMENT NOW