Abstract
The connection between caste and religion in India, creates a complicated legal issue, especially when it comes to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribes (SC/ST) status after an individual convert into some other religion. Although the Constitution of India gives special benefits to help communities dad have faced discrimination, these reservations have mainly been limited to Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhists. Let’s look at the legal rules, court decisions, policy discussions and ongoing debate about whether SC/ST individuals who convert to other religion can still get these benefits.
Introduction
India’s caste system has been a determinant of social hierarchy for an long time and historically SC/ST people are subjected to discrimination and marginalization. To consider these kinds of injustices, the Indian constitution provides affirmative measures, including reservations in education, employment, and political representation. However, the connection between the caste system and the religion give rise to challenges, particularly when individuals from SC/ST backgrounds convert to religions, such as Christianity or Islam.
The constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, restricts Scheduled Castes (SC) status to Hindus later extended to Sikhs and Buddhists, thereby excluding those who converts to other religions. This exclusion raise is critical questions about whether caste-based discrimination truly ends after conversion.
Key Words
Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribes, Indian Constitution, Religious Conversion, Reservation Policies, KG Balakrishnan Panel, Ranganath Misra Commission, Social Justice.
Constitutional and Legal Framework
The classification of Scheduled Castes (SC) is governed by article 341 of the Indian constitution. Under article 341(1), the President may specify by public notification, the castes deemed to be Scheduled Caste (SC) for a state or union territory. However, the Constitution (Scheduled Caste) Order, 1950, which was issued soon after the Constitution came into the force include a critical limitation.
Clause 3 of the 1950 Order states that, “No person who professes a religion different form the Hindu, the Sikh, or the Buddhist religion shall be deemed to be a member of a Scheduled Caste.”
The Sikhs (since 1956) and the Buddhist (since 1990) were later included in this order, and no such inclusion has been made for Christians or Muslims. This effectively exclude Muslims and Christians, even if they belong to historically oppressed castes, from being recognizing as Scheduled Caste under the law.
Judicial Interpretations
The Apex Court has addressed this issue in several cases:
Soosai vs. Union of India (1985 SCC OnLine SC 364): In this case, the Supreme Court held that a person who have converted into Christianity from Hinduism does not automatically retain his SC status. The Court said that unless the individual can show that the “social disabilities” continue post-conversion with the same “obsessive severity”, they cannot claim the benefit of SC reservation.
Indra Swahney vs. Union of India (1992): In its landmark 1992 judgement in the Mandal case, the Supreme Court said the purpose of the OBC quota was to address historical discrimination faced by certain groups, and “No class of citizens can be classified as backward solely by reason of religion, race, caste, sex, descent, place of birth, residence, or any of them” In essence, the court held that while religion and other factors of group identity were relevant, they could not be the sole criteria to provide reservation within the OBC quota.
Ghazi Saaduddin vs. State of Maharashtra (2001 SCC OnLine Bom 933): In this case, The constitutional validity of the 1950 Scheduled Caste order was challenged The issue has been pending since 2004, but the court said in 2011 that it would examine the clause 3 and the constitutionality of not including Christians and Muslims, alongside Buddhist and Sikhs.
The case is still pending and no significant progress has been made until recently. In April, 2024 the Supreme Court deferred hearings, citing that the Centre has appointed a new commission to examine the issue.
Social Reality and Continued Discrimination
Multiple academic studies, social surveys, and human rights reports have documented that caste-based discrimination is also present among Muslims and Christians. The idea that conversion erases caste identity is just theoretical. In practice, Dalit Christians and Dalit Muslims continue to face systemic marginalization, social exclusion and deprivation in the society.
The Ranganath Misra Commission, constituted by UPA-I government in 2007, concluded in its report that, “ Caste is a social phenomenon which exists in all religious communities in India, and individuals continue to face similar level of discrimination even after conversion.” The commission recommended that “Once a person has been included in a Scheduled Caste list a wilful change of religion on his part should not affect the adversely his or her Scheduled Caste status.”
KG Bala Krishna Commission
In October 2022, the Government of India set up the KG Balakrishnan Panel, headed by former Chief Justice of India K.G. Balakrishnan, to study whether SC status should be extended to individuals who convert to other religions.
The panel conducted public hearings across several states in November 2024 and has been granted time until October 2025 to submit its final report. Until then, the Court has put the matter on hold.
Notably, the Central Government has clarified that it has not accepted the Ranganath Misra Commission’s report and prefers to wait for the findings of the KG Balakrishnan Panel.
Conclusion
The status of SC/ST individuals after religious conversion remains a highly contested issue in India’s legal and social landscape. While the Constitution aims to uphold equality and social justice, the 1950 Presidential Order continues to create a divide among Dalits based on religion.
The Supreme Court, over decades, has acknowledged the persistence of caste discrimination even after conversion but has refrained from extending SC status to Dalit Christians and Muslims. Reports like the Ranganath Misra Commission have recommended a religion-neutral approach, yet political will remains divided.
With the KG Balakrishnan Commission expected to submit its findings by October 2025, there is hope for a resolution that is fair, inclusive, and constitutionally sound.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal falls into the category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
WRITTEN BY ABHINAV VERMA
