Why in news?

The Supreme Court ruled that conversions driven solely by the intent to secure reservation benefits are impermissible, labeling such actions a "fraud on the Constitution."

While affirming the fundamental right to profess and practice religion under Article 25, the bench clarified that genuine conversions are inspired by sincere belief in the principles of the new faith, not ulterior motives like reservations.

The court highlighted that misuse of reservation policies undermines their objective to uplift historically disadvantaged communities. Granting benefits to individuals without genuine claims defeats the social purpose of reservations.

What’s in today’s article?

• SC Reservations and Religion
• Case Background
• Anti-Conversion Laws in India

SC Reservations and Religion

• Existing provision for SC reservation
  • The original rationale behind giving reservation to Scheduled Castes was that these sections had suffered from the social evil of untouchability.
    • Untouchability was practised among Hindus.
  • Article 341 of the Constitution empowers the President to specify the castes, races or tribes etc. which shall be deemed to be Scheduled Castes.
• SC reservations and Dalit Coverts - Constitutional context
  • Currently, the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 stipulates that no person professing a religion different from Hinduism, Buddhism or Sikhism can be deemed to be a member of a Schedule Caste.
    • The original order under which only Hindus were classified was later amended to include Sikhs and Buddhists.
  • Hence, Dalits who get converted to Christianity and Islam are not covered and they do not get the quota benefits.
    • Interestingly, the religion-based bar does not apply to converted STs and OBCs.
      • As per the government, the rights of a person belonging to a Scheduled Tribe are independent of his/her religious faith.
    • Also, following the implementation of the Mandal Commission report, several Christian and Muslim communities have found place in the Central and state lists of OBCs.
• Larger constitutional question on extending SC benefits to Dalit Christians and Muslims
  • A batch of petitions were filed in the Supreme Court seeking the inclusion of Dalit Christians and Dalit Muslims and the removal of the religion criteria for inclusion as SCs.
  • In August 2022, the Supreme Court had directed the Centre to submit its current position on the issue.
  • In light of that, the Union Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment issued a notification in October 2022 to form a three-member Commission to study the matter.
    • The three-member Commission is headed by former Chief Justice of India, Justice K.G. Balakrishnan.
• Views of previous panels on this issue
  • Ranganath Misra Commission (submitted report in 2007)
    • It recommended that SC status should be completely de-linked from religion.
  • Sachar Committee (2005)
    • This  Report observed that the social and economic situation of Dalit Muslims and Dalit Christians did not improve after conversion.

Case Background

• Case matter
  • The appellant, C. Selvarani, challenged a January 2023 Madras High Court order dismissing her plea for SC status.
  • She claimed to belong to the Valluvan caste, recognized under the Constitution (Pondicherry) Scheduled Castes Order, 1964. Selvarani argued that she had been practising Hindu rituals since birth.
• Judgment by Supreme Court
  • The judgment upheld a Madras High Court ruling denying SC status to a woman born and baptised as a Christian, who later claimed to be Hindu to avail reservation benefits.
  • Despite holding an SC certificate, inquiries revealed her continued Christian practices, including church attendance and baptism.
  • The court ruled her claims as fraudulent and unsupported by evidence of reconversion.

Anti-Conversion Laws in India

• Historical Context of Anti-Conversion Laws
  • India has a long history of anti-conversion laws dating back to pre-Independence, with princely states enacting acts like the Raigarh State Conversion Act (1936) and Udaipur State Anti-Conversion Act (1946).
  • Post-Independence attempts at central anti-conversion legislation in 1954, 1960, and 1978 failed due to lack of support.
• Modern Anti-Conversion Laws
  • Several states, including Orissa (1967), Madhya Pradesh (1968), and Arunachal Pradesh (1978), enacted anti-conversion laws.
  • These laws were upheld by the Supreme Court in Rev Stainislaus Vs State of Madhya Pradesh (1977), which ruled that Article 25(1) does not guarantee a fundamental right to convert others.
  • The court emphasized that coercive or deceitful conversions violate the freedom of conscience.
• Relevant Precedents
  • Sapna Jacob Case (1993): Courts can scrutinize the intent behind conversions but not test the depth of religious belief.
  • Hadiya Vs Ashokan (2018): The right to choose one’s faith must be free from coercion or deceit.