While members belonging to certain de-notified tribes even now complain about being branded “criminals” by the police, it is worthwhile to note that the Madras State had as early as 1947 repealed the Criminal Tribes Act, 1924, in the province, showing the way for the rest of the country.
Under the British-era law, members of certain communities in different parts of the country, including Madras, were declared as belonging to the “criminal tribes”. In Tamil Nadu, those classified as “criminal tribes” included members of the communities of Korawas (Kuravar), Kallars, Ambalgars, Lambadis, Irulars, Dasaris, Kaladis, Maravars, Karumbaravas, Thottia Naicks, and Vettaikarans. However, in January 1947, a Bill to exclude the Province of Madras from the operation of the Criminal Tribes Act was introduced under proviso 73 of the Madras Assembly Rules. The Statements of Objects and Reasons of the Bill noted that several representations were received by the government for the repeal of the Act in the province.
Representations examined
“The Government have examined these representations and find that the provisions of this Act are so rigorous that their application to members of tribes is more likely to make them hardened criminals than to reform them,” it noted.
The notification of the Bill in The Fort St. George Gazette said the special provisions in the Act were “obviously made to suit unsettled times” and their continuance could hardly be justified in the light of modern progressive penology. Further, the substantive and preventive provisions of the existing law, viz., the Indian Penal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, are quite adequate to deal with members of the tribes. “The Government have therefore decided that it is no longer necessary to continue in force the special provisions contained in the Act. The Bill is intended to achieve this object,” it said.
This was as a result of strong public opinion and on account of the overriding fact that nobody is criminal by birth. The Bombay State was the second to repeal the Act in 1949. Prior to that, the Madras State had amended the Criminal Tribes Act on two occasions: 1943 and 1945.
Committee set up
Eventually, after Independence, the Government of India set up the Criminal Tribes Act Enquiry Committee (1949-50), headed by M. Ananthasayanam Ayyangar, the first Deputy Speaker of the Lok Sabha. The committee, citing the cases of Madras and Bombay, had invited the opinion of other States where the Act was in force on the question of repeal or otherwise.
The committee said in its 1950 report that while there was almost unanimity of feeling in the country among all sections of the people that the Criminal Tribes Act should be repealed as it brands members of certain communities as criminal by birth, “there is equally a large demand for some kind of control and restriction over the habitual offenders, to whatever community they may belong”. This demand was met in Madras and Bombay States by enactment of the Madras Restriction of Habitual Offenders Act and the Bombay Habitual Offenders (Restriction) Act.
Increase in crime
At that time, the Inspector-General of Police and the Deputy Inspector-General, Criminal Investigation Department, Madras, told the committee that there was a great increase in crime in the State after the repeal of the Act. However, significantly the officers “admitted that it could not be definitely attributed to the repeal of the Criminal Tribes Act”. Besides, the officers were unable to produce any figures to show if any member of the former criminal tribes were responsible for the increase.
Incidentally, when the law was in force, Madras followed a system of “abeyance” by which all members of the notified criminal tribes were generally registered “on their attaining 16 years of age”. The abeyance system was introduced in 1927 in Coimbatore district as a trial and as it was found to be working satisfactorily it was extended to the other districts in 1932. When the registered persons were found to have criminal propensities or were reasonably suspected of having been concerned in crimes after registration, they were brought under certain restrictions. However, after 1946, all the criminal tribe members were not registered on attaining the age of 16 as a liberal view was taken and the registration was restricted to “dangerous persons”. Such of those uncontrollable and dangerous notified tribes or members of any notified tribe whose presence was considered to be injurious to the community at large were restricted in their movements.
Abeyance system appreciated
While the Ananthasayanam Committee appreciated the abeyance system, it observed that it would have been better not to register a person at all “merely on his attaining the age of 16 years”, unless convicted, instead of first registering him and then giving him the advantage of abeyance. The committee rightly flagged the mental trauma that registration would cause to the members of the tribes. If the advantage of abeyance is immediately given after registration the practical effect will be the same, “but in that case also one has to consider the amount of mental worries to which an innocent member of the Criminal Tribes will be put to and the psychological effect on him of such registration”, it said.
Acting on the committee’s report, the Government of India abolished the Criminal Tribes Act across the country and classified the members of those communities as De-Notified Communities.
