<p>The Supreme Court’s ruling that conversion to any religion other than Hinduism, Buddhism, and Sikhism would result in the “immediate and complete loss” of the Scheduled Caste status and statutory benefits and protections does not recognise the intricacies of India’s caste system and its hold on society. </p><p>It also leaves some legal issues relevant to the matter unresolved. The ruling is based on the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, which mandates that “no person who professes a religion different from Hinduism shall be deemed to be a member of a Schedule Caste”. Later, Sikhism and Buddhism were added to this order. A bench of Justices Prashant Mishra and Manmohan upheld an order of the Andhra Pradesh High Court that dismissed a petition filed by a person who had converted to Christianity but claimed protection under the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act after suffering casteist attacks.</p><p>India’s reality of caste as a social institution and personal expression does not disappear with a change of religion. Members of the Scheduled Castes who convert to Christianity and Islam have also experienced discrimination. Sikhism doctrinally rejects the caste system, but divisions along these lines are real. In an unequal society, conversion to another religion does not ensure equality for the converted. </p><p>The ruling is based on the restrictions spelled out in the 1950 order – the Court termed them “categorical and absolute.” But petitions challenging the validity of the order are pending in the Court. The position that converts would lose their reservation rights may also not align with the constitutional right to freedom of religion and the right to equality.</p><p>The Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950, does not prescribe religion-based exclusion as in the case of the Scheduled Castes. It says a person’s ST status is based on tribal identity, customary practices, etc., and not on religion. The Court has now ruled that a convert from an ST community could claim benefits only if he or she continued to belong to the tribe in substance. This amounts to extending the bar for SC converts to the reservation for STs. </p><p>The question might also arise if members of OBCs (Other Backward Classes) would lose their rights if they converted to non-Indic religions. The Justice Ranganath Mishra Commission report, in 2007, recommended SC reservation for Dalit converts to Christianity and Islam. It is noteworthy that the Central government rejected the report and established another commission, under Justice KG Balakrishnan, which has yet to submit its findings.</p>
<p>The Supreme Court’s ruling that conversion to any religion other than Hinduism, Buddhism, and Sikhism would result in the “immediate and complete loss” of the Scheduled Caste status and statutory benefits and protections does not recognise the intricacies of India’s caste system and its hold on society. </p><p>It also leaves some legal issues relevant to the matter unresolved. The ruling is based on the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, which mandates that “no person who professes a religion different from Hinduism shall be deemed to be a member of a Schedule Caste”. Later, Sikhism and Buddhism were added to this order. A bench of Justices Prashant Mishra and Manmohan upheld an order of the Andhra Pradesh High Court that dismissed a petition filed by a person who had converted to Christianity but claimed protection under the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act after suffering casteist attacks.</p><p>India’s reality of caste as a social institution and personal expression does not disappear with a change of religion. Members of the Scheduled Castes who convert to Christianity and Islam have also experienced discrimination. Sikhism doctrinally rejects the caste system, but divisions along these lines are real. In an unequal society, conversion to another religion does not ensure equality for the converted. </p><p>The ruling is based on the restrictions spelled out in the 1950 order – the Court termed them “categorical and absolute.” But petitions challenging the validity of the order are pending in the Court. The position that converts would lose their reservation rights may also not align with the constitutional right to freedom of religion and the right to equality.</p><p>The Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950, does not prescribe religion-based exclusion as in the case of the Scheduled Castes. It says a person’s ST status is based on tribal identity, customary practices, etc., and not on religion. The Court has now ruled that a convert from an ST community could claim benefits only if he or she continued to belong to the tribe in substance. This amounts to extending the bar for SC converts to the reservation for STs. </p><p>The question might also arise if members of OBCs (Other Backward Classes) would lose their rights if they converted to non-Indic religions. The Justice Ranganath Mishra Commission report, in 2007, recommended SC reservation for Dalit converts to Christianity and Islam. It is noteworthy that the Central government rejected the report and established another commission, under Justice KG Balakrishnan, which has yet to submit its findings.</p>
