the story So Far: The Supreme Court of India on Tuesday (March 24, 2026) ruled that a priest from the Madiga community in Andhra Pradesh He cannot claim to be a member of a Scheduled Caste because he had adopted a religion which did not fall within the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950.Which the court says imposes a religion ban that is “absolute”.
The Supreme Court upheld the decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court, which had delivered the verdict in an alleged case of torture where a priest had reported that some members of his village in Guntur district had attacked and threatened him while he was leading Sunday prayers at a resident’s house. The accused had approached the high court arguing that Pastor Chintada Anand cannot claim Scheduled Caste status as he has converted, and hence the provisions of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act cannot be applicable in the case. Mr Anand approached the Supreme Court, which upheld the High Court’s decision.
Can a person of Christian religion belong to Scheduled Caste?
In the judgment, the bench of Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice Manmohan said that the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 clearly defines the parameters under which Scheduled Castes are to be identified in the country. The order includes a clause that says, “No person who professes a religion other than Hinduism, Sikhism or Buddhism shall be deemed to be a member of a Scheduled Caste.”
The judgment states that this ban on religion has been imposed by the Constitution. (SC) The order was “complete” without any exceptions. Interpreting this restriction on religion, the Supreme Court has stated that the word “professor” here means “publicly professing or practicing a religion. The essence of the term lies in the open acceptance of one’s religious beliefs in a manner understandable to the public at large. It is not a question of mere personal belief or private conviction, but requires outward expression of one’s faith”.
In the case it was considering, the Court, in its judgment of 24 March, stated that the Appellant “professes the Christian religion”, which was not mentioned in the Constitution Order. “Whatever the caste of origin of the appellant may be, he cannot be considered a member of a Scheduled Caste,” the court said, adding, “Conversion to any religion not specified in section 3 results in immediate and complete termination of Scheduled Caste status from the moment of conversion irrespective of birth.”
Furthermore, the court stated that “Christianity, by its theological basis, does not recognize or incorporate the institution of caste.” The court held that the moment a person ceases to be a member of a Scheduled Caste by virtue of religious conversion, “the loss of such status is accompanied by the automatic and immediate cessation of all entitlements to statutory benefits, protections, reservations, preferences and rights which are based on or flow from such membership”, including protection under the SC/ST Act.
Even though Mr Anand argued that he had a caste certificate showing that he belonged to the Madiga community, which is designated as a Scheduled Caste, the Supreme Court said, “Mere production of the certificate cannot overturn the admitted fact that the Appellant is a Christian”, adding, “There is no evidence that the Appellant has reverted to Hinduism or that the community has accepted him back.”
Is this question new? What is the Centre’s position on this?
The Supreme Court is considering the question of Scheduled Caste status for people belonging to historically Dalit communities who have converted to Islam or Christianity over time. A petition to grant Scheduled Caste status to Dalit Christians and Muslims was filed in 2004, the hearing on which is still going on.
Hearing these cases over the years, the petitioners have argued that many communities across the country historically belonged to Scheduled Caste groups but, over time, converted to religions such as Christianity and Islam. Even if their choice of faith was due to their desire to be free from caste, the petitioners have argued that in India, caste has also permeated religions such as Christianity and Islam. He has cited government-commissioned reports from the first decade of the 21st century supporting his position that Dalit Muslims and Christians should be granted Scheduled Caste status.
Meanwhile, the central government has relied on the Constitution (SC) Order, 1950 and argued that unlike Hinduism, Sikhism and Buddhism, Dalit Muslims and Christians should be excluded because of the “foreign origin” of these religions.
However, the petitioners have argued that the Constitution (SC) Order, 1950 was amended over the years, first to include Sikhism more broadly in the 1950s and then to include Buddhism in the 1990s, in response to the call of Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar for large numbers of people turning to Buddhism in some parts of the country.
In October 2022, the Center constituted an inquiry commission headed by former Chief Justice of India KG Balakrishnan to examine the issue of whether Scheduled Caste status could be granted to converts to Islam and Christianity. After several extensions, the deadline for this commission is coming in April this year.
What about those who have ‘converted’ to Hinduism, Sikhism or Buddhism?
Although the Centre’s inquiry commission has not yet submitted its report, pending which the Supreme Court bench hearing these cases will proceed, on March 24 the bench of Justices Mishra and Manmohan laid down the limits of what counts as “reconversion”, what the burden of proof is and on whom that burden should fall.
In the March 24 judgment, the Supreme Court said that if a person of Scheduled Caste origin claims to have “reconverted” to any of the religions mentioned in the Constitution (SC) Order, 1950, three specific conditions must be fulfilled “cumulatively and conclusively”. These are: the person must be able to prove that they “originally” belonged to the Scheduled Caste group, there must be “credible and indisputable evidence of re-conversion to the original religion”, and there must be evidence of “acceptance and assimilation by members of the original caste and the community concerned”.
Laying down these conditions, the top court said, “All the above three conditions are mandatory and cumulative. The burden of proving re-conversion rests entirely on the claimant, which has to be proved through undisputed evidence.”
Elaborating on the proof of “conversion”, the Supreme Court said that it must include “complete and express renunciation of the religion to which the conversion took place, complete separation from it, and actual adoption and observance of the customs, usages, customs, rituals and religious obligations of the original caste”. Furthermore, the court said, “Mere self-proclamation is insufficient i.e., the community must recognize and accept the person as one of its own.”
What about Scheduled Tribes?
While the Supreme Court has held that the religion restriction for Scheduled Castes was “absolute”, for the Scheduled Tribe category, the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950 did not stipulate any such religion-based exclusion. “Therefore, determination of Scheduled Tribe status cannot depend on mere conversion, but must depend on whether the claimant possesses the essential attributes of tribal identity, including customary practices, social organisation, community life and acceptance by the tribal community concerned,” the court said. Held.
The top court said, “Where conversion or subsequent conduct results in complete alienation of the tribal way of life and loss of community recognition, the fundamental basis of Scheduled Tribe status will be lost. On the contrary, where such attributes clearly exist or are actually re-established and accepted by the tribal community, the claim cannot be rejected. The assessment in such cases is necessarily fact-specific and left to the competent authority to decide in accordance with constitutional principles.”
The absence of religious restrictions for STs is seen from how hundreds of ST communities in different parts of the country practice several other indigenous religions such as Christianity, Islam and Sarnism. And while there are states like Nagaland or regions like Jammu and Kashmir, where entire ST communities may convert to Islam or Christianity over time, there are also states like Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Madhya Pradesh, where tribal movements have emerged, insisting that ST communities who have converted to religions other than the indigenous ones should be denied access to statutory benefits meant for STs.
