In a significant verdict, the Supreme Court has said
religious conversions undertaken solely to avail reservation benefits without
genuine belief amounted to a "fraud on the Constitution".
Justices Pankaj Mithal and R Mahadevan passed the
verdict on November 26 in a case filed by one C Selvarani and upheld a Madras
High Court decision of January 24 denying a scheduled caste certificate to a
woman who converted to Christianity but later claimed to be a Hindu to secure
employment benefits.
Justice Mahadevan, who wrote the 21-page verdict for
the bench, further underscored that one converted to a different religion, when
they were genuinely inspired by its principles, tenets and spiritual thoughts.
"However, if the purpose of conversion is
largely to derive the benefits of reservation but not with any actual belief in
the other religion, the same cannot be permitted, as the extension of benefits
of reservation to people with such ulterior motives will only defeat the social
ethos of the policy of reservation, he noted.
The evidence presented before the bench was found to
have clearly demonstrated that the appellant professed Christianity and
actively practiced the faith by attending church regularly.
"Despite the same, she claims to be a Hindu and
seeks for a SC community certificate for the purpose of employment," it
noted.
"Such a dual claim made by her," said the
bench "was untenable and she cannot continue to identify herself as a
Hindu after baptism".
The top court, therefore, held the conferment of
scheduled caste communal status to the woman, who was a Christian by faith, but
claimed to be still embracing Hinduism only for the purpose of availing
reservation in employment, "would go against the very object of
reservation and would amount to fraud on the Constitution".
The top court underlined a religious conversion
solely to access reservation benefits, without genuine belief in the adopted
religion, undermined the fundamental social objectives of the quota policy and
her actions were contrary to the spirit of reservation policies aimed at
uplifting the marginalised communities.
Selvarani, born to a Hindu father and a Christian
mother, was baptised as a Christian shortly after birth but later claimed to be
a Hindu and sought an SC certificate to apply for an upper division clerk
position in Puducherry in 2015.
While her father belonged to the Valluvan caste,
categorised under scheduled castes, he had converted to Christianity, as
confirmed by documentary evidence.
The verdict said the appellant continued to practice
Christianity, as seen by the regular church attendance, making her claim of
being a Hindu untenable.
The bench noted individuals converting to
Christianity lose their caste identity and must provide compelling evidence of
reconversion and acceptance by their original caste to claim SC benefits.
The judgement said there was no substantial evidence
of the appellant's reconversion to Hinduism or acceptance by the Valluvan
caste.
Her claims lacked public declarations, ceremonies,
or credible documentation to substantiate her assertions, it pointed out.
"One converts to a different religion when
genuinely inspired by its principles. Conversion purely for reservation
benefits, devoid of belief, is impermissible," the bench held.
The apex court opined in any case, upon conversion
to Christianity, one lost their caste and couldn't be identified by it.
"As the factum of reconversion is disputed,
there must be more than a mere claim. The conversion had not happened by any
ceremony or through 'Arya Samaj'. No public declaration was effected. There is
nothing on record to show that she or her family has reconverted to Hinduism
and on the contrary, there is a factual finding that the appellant still professes
Christianity, it noted.
The bench said there was evidence against the
appellant, and therefore, her contention raised that the caste would be under
eclipse upon conversion and resumption of the caste upon reconversion, was
"unsustainable".