Story so far:
On March 24, the Supreme Court ruled in the case of Chinthada Anand v. State of Andhra Pradesh that a pastor from the Madiga community in Andhra Pradesh cannot claim to be a Scheduled Caste (SC) member because he converted to Christianity. The court upheld the decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court, which reached the same conclusion in the case of the alleged atrocity.
Can a person of Christian faith be SC?
A Bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Manmohan held that the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 clearly defines the parameters by which SCs are to be identified. The provision in it says: “No person who professes a religion other than Hindu, Sikh or Buddhist shall be deemed to belong to a Scheduled Caste.
The judgment said this bar on religion imposed by the Constitution (SC) order was “absolute” without exceptions. The court said that the expression “profess” in the clause in the regulation “means to publicly declare or practice religion”. In its March 24 decision, the court said the appellant “professes Christianity” – a religion not listed in the Order.
“Conversion to any religion not mentioned in Article 3 results in immediate and complete loss of Scheduled Caste status from the time of conversion, irrespective of birth,” the court said. He added: “Christianity by its very theological basis does not recognize or incorporate the institution of caste.
The court ruled that the moment a person ceases to be a member of the SC on account of conversion, “the loss of such status carries with it the automatic termination of eligibility for all statutory benefits, protections, reservations, preferences and entitlements contingent upon or accruing from such membership”, including those under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
Although Chinthada Anand claimed that he had a caste certificate proving that he belonged to the Madiga community, designated as SC community, the court said, “The mere production of the certificate cannot override the admitted fact that the appellant is a practicing Christian”. He also said there was no evidence to suggest that Mr Anand had re-converted to Hinduism or that the community had accepted him back.
Is this question new? What is the center’s position on this?
The court dealt with the issue of SC status for people from Dalit communities who converted to Islam or Christianity. A petition was filed in 2004 to grant SC status to Dalit Christians and Muslims, which is still pending.
The petitioners have argued over the years that several communities have historically belonged to SC groups but over time have converted to faiths such as Christianity and Islam. While their choice of faith may have been driven by a desire to break free from their caste, caste also entered into their chosen faiths. They cited government-commissioned reports from the first decade of the 21st century to support their position that Dalit Muslims and Christians should be given SC status.
Relying on the Constitution Order (SC) of 1950, the Union government argued that Dalit Muslims and Christians should continue to be excluded because of the “foreign origin” of these religions, unlike Hinduism, Sikhism and Buddhism.
The petitioners argued that the Constitution (SC) Order 1950 was amended first to include Sikhism in the 1950s and then Buddhism in the 1990s in response to the large number of people in parts of the country who converted to Buddhism and heeded the call of Dr. BR Ambedkar.
In October 2022, the Center constituted a commission of inquiry headed by former Chief Justice of India KG Balakrishnan to examine the issue of whether SC status can be granted to SC converts to Islam and Christianity. The deadline for the commission is set for April this year.
What about people who have “re-converted” to Hinduism, Sikhism or Buddhism?
While the Centre’s commission of inquiry is yet to submit its report before the Supreme Court bench hearing the matters continues, Justices Mishra and Manmohan on March 24 laid down the threshold for what counts as “back conversion”, what the burden of proof is and on whom the burden must fall.
The court noted that if a person of SC origin claimed to have “re-converted” to any of the faiths listed in the Constitution (SC) Order, 1950, three specific conditions had to be “cumulatively and demonstrably” met. First, a person must be able to prove that he “originally belonged” to the SC group. Second, there must be “credible and indisputable evidence of bona fide conversion back to the original religion”. Third, there must be evidence of “acceptance and assimilation by members of the original caste and community concerned”. The court stated that “the burden of proof of reverse conversion rests squarely on the plaintiff, who must be proved by undisputed evidence.”
The Supreme Court, while elaborating on the proof of “back-conversion”, said that it should be accompanied by “a complete and unequivocal renunciation of the religion to which the conversion has taken place, complete separation from it and actual adoption and observance of the customs, customs, practices, rituals and religious obligations of the original caste”.
What about Scheduled Tribes (STs)?
The court said that for STs, no such exclusion on the basis of religion was prescribed in the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950. “Therefore, the determination of Scheduled Tribe status cannot rest on conversion alone, but must rest on whether the applicant continues to possess and is recognized for the essential attributes of tribal identity, including customary practices, social organization, community tribal life and acceptance by the appropriate court.”
The court said that if a person’s conversion or subsequent acts completely sever his connection with the tribal way of life and he loses recognition within the community, his ST status is weakened. Conversely, if the tribal attributes remain or are reintroduced and accepted by the community, the claim cannot be automatically rejected. Such cases must be assessed on the basis of specific facts by the competent authority in accordance with constitutional principles.
Hundreds of ST communities practice Christianity, Islam and indigenous faiths such as Sarnaism. And while there are states like Nagaland where entire ST communities can convert to Islam or Christianity over time, there are also states like Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand where there has been a rise in Adivasi movements insisting that ST communities who convert to a non-indigenous faith be stripped of statutory benefits meant for STs.
Published – 29 March 2026 01:30 IST
