New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that conversion to any religion except Hinduism, Sikhism or Buddhism, results in immediate and complete loss of Scheduled Caste (SC) status.
Such a person, it said, cannot avail benefit of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act—a special criminal legislation meant to protect SCs and Scheduled Tribes (STs).
Relying on the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order of 1950, the court pointed out that SC status was earlier only granted to persons professing the Hindu religion. The order was subsequently amended in 1956 and later in 1990 to include persons professing Sikhism and Buddhism, respectively.
Importantly, the court said that those belonging to the Christian faith cannot claim SC status, even if they previously had it before conversion, since “Christianity, by its very theological foundation, does not recognize or incorporate the institution of caste.”
The bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Manmohan said that in cases where a person claims to have reconverted from a religion other than Hinduism, Sikhism, or Buddhism, they must meet three conditions: clear proof that they originally belonged to a caste notified under the 1950 Order.
There must also be credible and unimpeachable evidence of bona fide reconversion to the original religion, accompanied by complete and unequivocal renunciation of the religion to which conversion had taken place, it said.
Additionally, there must be satisfactory and credible evidence establishing acceptance and assimilation by the members of the original caste and the community concerned, the court said, adding that mere self-proclamation is insufficient and the community must accept them as “one of their own”.
Case journey
The court’s decision came on an appeal filed against an Andhra Pradesh High Court order that set aside criminal proceedings against Kothapealem villagers in Guntur district under the SC/ST Act.
They faced prosecution for allegedly assaulting and abusing a pastor, who later lodged a complaint in December 2020. The pastor originally belonged to an SC group of the Hindu-Madiga community. He moved the Supreme Court against the HC’s April 2025 judgement.
“Christianity, by its very theological foundation, does not recognize or incorporate the institution of caste. The foundational Christian scripture, The New Testament states: There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one,” the bench said, after reserving the matter for eight months.
Pointing out that the pastor occupied a position of religious leadership within the Christian faith, and was entrusted with the responsibility of preaching the gospel and conducting other religious services, the court noted that his conduct over a period of time demonstrated an open and public declaration of his Christian faith.
The reason for the HC dismissing his plea was that he could not have sought refuge of the SC/ST Act as he had denounced his identity as a Hindu as well as his SC origin.
In April, last year, the accused men approached the HC for quashing criminal proceedings against them. They argued that since the pastor was a convert, and was working as a pastor for a decade now, he could not legally claim SC status or seek protection under the 1989 Act.
After examining the witnesses, the HC ruled that statements of the accused did not support the pastor’s version of an assault by a large group, and that continuing legal proceedings against them would amount to an abuse of the legal process. There was only one simple injury sustained by the pastor, it noted.
Also Read: Why Delhi HC ruled SC/ST Act cannot be invoked to obstruct bank’s claim over mortgaged property
The harassment
The pastor pointed to several instances of abuse and harassment from the villagers, which started occurring from December 2020 onwards.
For instance, in January 2021, one of the accused allegedly called him outside the house where he was conducting his prayer meeting, and assaulted him apart from threatening him with dire consequences if he would continue the meetings.
Days later, he alleged, he was wrongfully restrained by the accused, who forcibly snatched his phone and keys, while dragging and beating him in public. Threats, he said, were also given to his family members and his children by the group of 25 men.
The police, according to the pastor, found that his attackers should be booked under the SC/ST Act, which penalises intentionally humiliating, intimidating or abusing SC members in public. The village tehsildar also issued a caste certificate to him showing that he belonged to the SC category, he added.
Besides this, the erstwhile Indian Penal Code (IPC) Sections 506, 323 and 341 which relate to criminal intimidation, voluntarily causing hurt, and wrongful restraint, were also invoked in the FIR registered on 26 January, 2021
In April, last year, the HC ruled that simple non-cancellation of the caste certificate by the authority to a person who has converted to Christianity cannot instill the protection granted under the 1989 Act.
Can a convert avail SC/ST Act?
Relying on the 1976 ruling delivered by the top court in CM Arumugam vs. S Rajagopal, the court proceeded to answer the question of what is “caste”. A caste is a more social combination than a religious group, the court had ruled previously while adding that “conversion operates as an expulsion from the caste.”
Citing a President’s order issued in 1950, the SC said that “no person who professes a religion different from the Hindu, Sikh or the Buddhist religion” can be termed as a Scheduled Caste. “Clause 3 restricted Scheduled Caste status to persons professing the Hindu religion,” it said, adding that it was amended in 1956 to include persons professing Sikhism.
In 1990, the provision was extended to include the Buddhists. “It is important to note that Christianity has not been included under this Order by any of these amendments,” the SC said.
Upholding the HC order, the bench said the 1989 Act is a special statute enacted for protecting the SC/ST groups from atrocities. Once the requirement of caste is extinguished, the statutory protection would also not be available, it said.
As for the offences under the IPC, the bench noted that due to the absence of proper testimony or eyewitness accounts confirming the pastor’s story, his statements were merely of “hearsay” nature.
(Edited by Tony Rai)
Also Read: Intellectual property theft comes under SC/ST Act. Win for Dalit couple, SC junks Maharashtra appeal