Conversion only for reservation, without ‘actual belief’, a fraud on Constitution: Supreme Court

“Despite the same, she claims to beryllium a Hindu and seeks for Scheduled Caste assemblage certificate for the intent of employment. Such a dual assertion made by her is untenable and she cannot proceed to place herself arsenic a Hindu aft baptism,” the seat said. “Therefore, the conferment of Scheduled Caste communal presumption to the appellant, who is simply a Christian by religion, but claims to beryllium inactive embracing Hinduism lone for the intent of availing preservation successful employment, would spell against the precise entity of preservation and would magnitude to fraud connected the Constitution.”

A larger question connected the constitutionality of utilizing religion arsenic a yardstick for Scheduled Caste quota is pending earlier the Supreme Court. The pleas fundamentally question preservation for Dalit converts to Christianity and Islam. The 1950 Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order issued by the President mandates SC presumption lone for Hindus. For the purposes of reservation, Sikhs and Buddhists are besides considered Hindus. In 2007, Justice Ranganath Mishra Commission study connected Religious and Linguistic Minorities, had recommended Scheduled Caste quota for Dalit Christians and Muslims.

Writing for the seat connected Tuesday, Justice Mahadevan said, “India is simply a secular country. Every national has a close to practise and profess a religion of their prime arsenic guaranteed nether Article 25 of the Constitution. One converts to a antithetic religion, erstwhile he/she is genuinely inspired by its principles, tenets and spiritual thoughts. However, if the intent of conversion is mostly to deduce the benefits of preservation but not with immoderate existent content successful the different religion, the aforesaid cannot beryllium permitted, arsenic the hold of benefits of preservation to radical with specified ulterior motives volition lone decision the societal ethos of the argumentation of reservation.”

Appellant C Selvarani had challenged the January 24, 2023 bid of the Madras High Court, which dismissed her writ petition.

She contended that she professes the Hindu religion and she belongs to Valluvan caste, which falls wrong the ambit of the The Constitution (Pondicherry) Scheduled Castes Order, 1964 and hence, she is entitled to get concession nether the Adi Dravida quota. Selvarani argued that close from birth, she has affinity successful professing Hinduism and has been going to temples and worshipping Hindu deities.

The appellant submitted that done assorted documents, she had been capable to beryllium that she was calved to a Hindu begetter and a Christian mother, who also, aft marriage, started to profess the Hindu religion; that her grandparents and large grandparents belonged to Valluvan caste. She besides claimed that passim her acquisition career, she was treated arsenic belonging to the SC assemblage and the transportation certificates besides affirmed her communal presumption arsenic such; and that her father, and her member possessed SC certificates.

However, the seat which perused the facts of the lawsuit said “the study submitted by the Village Administrative Officer, aft a elaborate enquiry and done the documentary grounds collected” intelligibly found that her begetter belonged to Scheduled Caste assemblage and parent was a Christian and their matrimony was performed arsenic per the Christian rituals. It said that “thereafter, the appellant’s begetter had converted to Christianity done baptism; baptism of the appellant’s member was done connected 07.05.1989; and the appellant was calved connected 22.11.1990 and she was baptized connected 06.01.1991 astatine Lourdes Shrine, Villianur, Pondicherry wrong 2 months”.

“Therefore, it is wide that the appellant was a calved Christian and she would not beryllium entitled to assertion the certificate nether Scheduled Caste category,” it said.

The seat said “the appellant and her family, if they truly intended to get themselves converted, ought to person done immoderate affirmative enactment to evince specified conversion alternatively than a meek assertion to beryllium practising Hinduism”.

“One of the methods of conversion is by adopting a process prescribed done the Arya Samaj. A nationalist declaration to the effect of evincing conversion could besides person been made,” it said.

The tribunal rejected arsenic “feeble” the woman’s statement that her baptism was done erstwhile she was little than 3 months old, saying “the aforesaid does not animate our assurance arsenic she did not marque immoderate effort to cancel the registration of baptism nor she filed immoderate declaratory suit successful this regard”.

The tribunal said that “the tract verification intelligibly revealed the registration of the matrimony of the parents of the appellant nether the Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872, the baptism of the appellant and her member and besides the information that they had been regularly attending the church… There is thing connected grounds to amusement that she oregon her household has reconverted to Hinduism and connected the contrary, determination is simply a factual uncovering that the appellant inactive professes Christianity”.