Conversion to religions other than Hinduism, Sikhism or Buddhism results in loss of Scheduled Caste status: Supreme Court

The apex court said that conversion to any other religion results in loss of Scheduled caste status.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday declared that no person who professes a religion other than Hindu, Sikh or Buddhism would be deemed to be a member of a Scheduled Caste. For the Scheduled Tribe status, the prescription, however, is not religion-based exclusion but adherence to customary practices, social organisation, community life, and acceptance by the concerned tribal community, it clarified.

A bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Manmohan said, the bar in respect of religion under Clause 3 of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 is categorical and absolute.

"Conversion to any religion not specified in Clause 3 (the Hindu, the Buddha and the Sikh) results in immediate and complete loss of Scheduled Caste status from the moment of conversion regardless of birth,'' the bench said.

The court dismissed a plea by Chinthada Anand, who worked as Pastor for 10 years, against the Andhra Pradesh High Court's order which quashed a criminal case lodged by him under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

The bench emphasized, a person cannot simultaneously profess and practice a religion other than the ones specified in Clause 3 of Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 and claim membership of a Scheduled Caste at the same time.

"A person who professes and practices such religion for personal, social and spiritual purposes cannot in law, assert membership of a Scheduled Caste for the purpose of securing statutory benefits. The two positions are mutually exclusive and contrary to the constitutional scheme,'' the court said.

The bench also dealt with the broader legal issue, namely, the conditions under which a person, who has undergone religious conversion, may avail the statutory benefits granted to the members of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The court pointed out, under Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution enumerated about the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.

"A person can claim benefits under the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950 only if he/she continues to belong to that particular tribe in substance. If, due to conversion or long-term abandonment of tribal customs, his/her tribal identity is in doubt, that question becomes a factual matter to be determined at trial,'' the bench said.

The court referred to State of Kerala Vs Chandramohan (2004), which stated, if by reason of conversion to a different religion a long time back, he/his ancestors have not been following the customs, rituals and other traits, which are required to be followed by the members of the tribe and even had not been following the customary laws of succession, inheritance, marriage etc. he may not be accepted to be a member of a tribe.

"It becomes clear that once a person belonging to a Scheduled Tribe converts to another religion, ultimately through the passage of time, the customs, rituals and other traits of that particular tribe may fall into eclipse,'' the bench said.

If it is proved that the person in question has completely renounced himself from the customs, rituals and other traits of his tribe, and has assimilated into the converted religion following the practices and customs of that particular religion, a reasonable inference can be drawn that such a person shall not be considered a part of the tribe, the bench added.

"The determination of Scheduled Tribe status, therefore, cannot rest on conversion alone, but must turn on whether the claimant continues to possess and is recognised for the essential attributes of tribal identity, including customary practices, social organisation, community life, and acceptance by the concerned tribal community. Where conversion or subsequent conduct results in a complete severance from the tribal way of life and loss of community recognition, the foundational basis for Scheduled Tribes status will stand eroded,'' the bench said.

The court pointed out, Clause 3 of Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 reveals that the term “professes” is of crucial significance. The clause excludes any person who professes a religion different from Hindu, Sikh or Buddhist from being deemed a member of a Scheduled Caste.

In the present case, the court noted, the appellant has been serving as a Pastor for the past 10 years and is also the treasurer of the Pastors fellowship in Pittalavanipalem. His occupation and conduct over this extended period constitute an open and public declaration of his Christian faith, the bench said.

"Had the appellant continued to profess Hinduism, his status as a member of the Scheduled Caste would have been beyond question. However, the appellant now professes Christianity,'' the court noted.

The court found the appellant professed Christianity, which was not among the three religions specified in Clause 3. Irrespective of the appellant’s caste of origin, which he claimed to be 'Madiga', he cannot be deemed to be a member of a Scheduled Caste, it said.

The appellant relied upon Andhra Pradesh government order of August 30, 1977, which extended certain concessions granted to Scheduled Castes (Hindus) to Scheduled Caste converts to Christianity and Buddhism.

The bench, however, pointed out, Clause 2 of the Government Order stated that only “non-statutory concessions’’ were being extended to Scheduled Caste converts to Christianity and Buddhism. These non-statutory concessions included economic support and similar welfare schemes which do not flow from statutory mandate.

The court held the reliance placed by the appellant on the government order as wholly misconceived. "Once the appellant converted to Christianity, the caste status, which he earlier enjoyed as a member of the Madiga community, stood eclipsed in the eyes of law,'' the bench said.

At the time of the alleged incident, the court noted, the appellant was conducting prayer meeting as a Pastor at the house of one Doma Koti Reddy, which leaves no room for doubt that he continued to remain a Christian on the date of the occurrence.

The bench also said, mere possession of the certificate will not be of any benefit to the appellant, as the said caste certificate is mandatorily required to be in consonance with the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950.

Having held that the appellant ceased to be a member of the Scheduled Caste community upon his conversion to Christianity, he cannot subsequently invoke the provisions of the SC/ST Act, the bench said.

After examining facts of the matter, the bench also held the basic foundation in respect of allegations of wrongful restraint, causing hurt and criminal intimidation made by the appellant were not present in the material collected during investigation.