The Supreme Court recently upheld the Bombay High Court’s judgment on intellectual property loss compensation under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and its Rules, 1995. The Court confirmed that researchers from the Scheduled Caste community deserve compensation for their intellectual property loss.
Supreme Court Upholds High Court Decision
The Bombay High Court ruled in favor of Dr. Kshipra Kamlesh Uke and Dr. Shiv Shankar Das, two researchers from Jawaharlal Nehru University. The researchers alleged that caste-based atrocities led to the theft of their research equipment and data. The High Court upheld that the definition of “property” under Section 15A(11)(d) must include both tangible and intangible assets. The Supreme Court endorsed this view and dismissed the State of Maharashtra’s Special Leave Petition. Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma noted, “We do not find any merit in the Special Leave Petition. Hence, the Special Leave Petition is dismissed.”
Intellectual Property as Compensable Loss
The Bombay High Court observed that the word “property” should have a plain and literal meaning. The Court stated that property includes immovable and movable assets, whether tangible or intangible. It further clarified that intangible assets such as patents, copyrights, or designs fall under this definition. The Court held that intellectual property is a legal right in a property that can be valued. The ruling emphasized that research data and survey forms qualify as intellectual property and must be compensated if lost.
Background of the Case
Dr. Uke and Dr. Das conducted socio-political research in Nagpur since 2014. They collected survey data from over 500 students along with other academic materials. In their absence from their rented residence, the landlord’s son, aided by police officials, broke in and stole critical research equipment. The theft resulted in the loss of valuable laptops containing essential research data. The researchers argued that this act amounted to a caste-based atrocity under the Atrocities Act.
They brought the issue before the National Commission for Scheduled Castes. The Commission recommended compensation and the formation of a Special Investigating Team (SIT) to further probe the incident. Although partial compensation of Rs. 4,50,000 was disbursed from a sanctioned sum of Rs. 6,00,000, the authorities did not compensate for the loss of intellectual property.
Legal Impact and Future Directions
The Bombay High Court directed the Nagpur District Magistrate to reassess the researchers’ claims, including the intellectual property loss, and to quantify the appropriate compensation. This decision reflects the legislative intent of the Atrocities Act to offer comprehensive relief to victims of caste-based atrocities. The ruling also empowers the Special Court to enhance compensation if the relief granted is found inadequate.
