The Supreme Court has dismissed a review petition challenging its March 24, 2026 judgment holding that a person belonging to a Scheduled Caste (SC) loses that status immediately upon converting to any religion other than Hinduism, Sikhism or Buddhism.
The Bench of Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice Manmohan held that there was no error apparent on the face of the record warranting review of its earlier judgment. The Court also rejected the review petitioner’s application seeking an oral hearing.
The review arose from the Court’s March 2026 judgment, which upheld an Andhra Pradesh High Court decision holding that a person belonging to a Scheduled Caste community ceases to enjoy Scheduled Caste status immediately and completely upon conversion to Christianity.
The Supreme Court had ruled that such a person was no longer entitled to claim statutory benefits, constitutional protections, reservations or other entitlements available exclusively to members of Scheduled Castes.
The dispute originated after a man from Andhra Pradesh, who was born into a Scheduled Caste but later converted to Christianity and became a pastor, lodged a First Information Report (FIR) under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, alleging that he had been abused by his caste name and criminally intimidated.
The accused challenged the FIR before the Andhra Pradesh High Court, contending that the complainant, having embraced Christianity, was no longer entitled to claim Scheduled Caste status or invoke the provisions of the SC/ST Act. Accepting this contention, the High Court quashed the criminal proceedings. The complainant subsequently approached the Supreme Court.
Affirming the High Court’s decision, the Supreme Court relied upon Clause 3 of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, which restricts Scheduled Caste status to persons professing Hinduism, Sikhism or Buddhism. The Court held that the statutory bar contained in Clause 3 is absolute and that conversion to any religion not specified under the Order results in the immediate and complete loss of Scheduled Caste status, irrespective of the person’s birth.
The Bench further clarified that the loss of Scheduled Caste status automatically results in the cessation of all statutory benefits, protections, reservations, preferences and legal entitlements that flow from such status. Consequently, a person professing Christianity or any other religion outside the scope of Clause 3 cannot claim the protections available under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act or other constitutional and statutory provisions meant exclusively for Scheduled Castes.
The Court examined the legislative history of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, noting that it originally recognised only persons professing Hinduism as members of Scheduled Castes. The Order was amended in 1956 to include Sikhs and later in 1990 to extend the benefit to Buddhists. The Court observed that Christianity has not been included under any of these amendments and noted that the religion, by its theological foundation, does not recognise the institution of caste.
The judgment also distinguished the legal position relating to Scheduled Tribes. Referring to the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950, the Court observed that entitlement to Scheduled Tribe status depends on continued tribal identity and adherence to tribal customs and traditions. It held that where a person, after conversion, completely abandons the customs, rituals and characteristics of the tribe and assimilates into another religion, the question whether the individual continues to belong to the tribe becomes a factual issue to be determined on the basis of evidence.
The Bench further held that a person cannot simultaneously profess and practise a religion other than Hinduism, Sikhism or Buddhism while claiming membership of a Scheduled Caste for the purpose of securing constitutional or statutory benefits.
It emphasised that any claim to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe status must be established through clear, cogent and unimpeachable evidence demonstrating that the claimant belongs to a caste or tribe specifically notified under the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 or the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950.
At the same time, the Court clarified that a person who subsequently reconverts to Hinduism, Sikhism or Buddhism may reclaim Scheduled Caste status, subject to strict conditions.
The claimant must establish that they were originally born into a caste notified as a Scheduled Caste, produce credible and unimpeachable evidence of a bona fide reconversion coupled with complete renunciation of the previously professed religion, and prove that members of the original caste community have accepted and assimilated them back into the community.
The Court made it clear that failure to satisfy even one of these conditions would render the claim for restoration of Scheduled Caste status legally unsustainable. Finding no apparent error in its March 2026 judgment, the Supreme Court dismissed the review petition and allowed the earlier decision to continue to govern the legal position on the effect of religious conversion on Scheduled Caste status.
The post Supreme Court dismisses review plea, upholds March verdict on loss of Scheduled Caste status after conversion appeared first on India Legal.