If a member of S.C/S.T converts to Christianity he is no longer SC/ST since Christianity does not recognise a hierarchical caste-based system

Appeal

Appeal against the order quashing SC/ST Act against 2 to 7 respondents

2) The present Appeal arises out of the impugned judgment dated 30.04.2025 passed by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati in Criminal Petition No. 7114 of 2022 filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, whereby, the High Court has quashed the criminal proceedings against respondent nos. 2 to 7 in Spl. SC No. 36 of 2021 arising out of FIR No. 08 of 2021 registered for offences punishable under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Sections 341, 506 and 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 on the file of the Special Court under the SC/ST Act, Guntur District.

Factual matrix

Appellant is a pastor belongs to SC caste: 3) The appellant in the present proceedings is Chinthada Anand, resident of Kothapalem Village, Pittalavanipalem Mandal, Guntur District. He claims to belong to the Madiga community, a Scheduled Caste and states that for nearly ten years prior to the incident, he had been conducting Sunday prayer meetings as a Pastor at different houses in the village, including the house of one Doma Koti Reddy.

Appellant received caste-based calls from unknown numbers: 4) According to the appellant, in December 2020, he began receiving abusive and intimidating telephone calls from unknown numbers, in which he was allegedly abused by caste-based slurs and was threatened with dire consequences. These calls, according to him, were on account of his religious activities and his presence in the village as a Pastor.

First incident: One of the accused called the appellant and abused him by referring his caste and warned against prayer meetings: 5) The first incident is stated to have occurred on 03.01.2021. The appellant alleges that while he was conducting Sunday prayers at around noon at the house of Doma Koti Reddy, one of the accused called him outside, assaulted him by slapping and striking him, abused him by referring to his caste, and warned him against continuing the prayer meetings. The appellant states that he did not retaliate.

Second incident: 6) The second and principal incident is stated to have occurred on 24.01.2021. It is alleged that after completing Sunday prayers and while returning home, the appellant was wrongfully restrained at the entrance of the nearby hamlet by respondent nos. 2 to 7 and twenty-five others. He alleged that his mobile phone and vehicle keys were forcibly snatched, he was dragged, beaten and abused by caste name in public view, and threatened with death. It is also alleged that threats were extended to kill his family members and kidnap his children.

Registration of FIR: 7) On the next day, i.e., 25.01.2021, the appellant submitted a written complaint before Chandole Police Station. On the basis of the said complaint, FIR No. 08 of 2021 came to be registered on 26.01.2021 for the offences punishable under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act and Sections 341, 506, 323 read with Section 34 of the IPC.

Investigation: 8) Investigation was undertaken by the Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Bapatla. During the course of investigation, statements of the appellant, his wife and several villagers were recorded. The appellant was medically examined and the injury sustained by him was certified to be simple in nature. The Tahsildar conducted verification regarding the caste status of the appellant and issued a certificate showing him as belonging to Hindu-Madiga community (Scheduled Caste), while the accused persons admittedly belonged to the Reddy community (OC category).

Final report: 9) Upon completion of investigation, the Police filed the charge-sheet on 30.04.2021, which was taken on file as Spl. SC No. 36 of 2021 before the Special Court under the SC/ST Act for Guntur District. All the aforementioned offences were included in the charge-sheet.

Accused seek quash on the ground since the appellant is a pastor, engaging in conversion cannot claim the status of Scheduled Caste

10) The accused persons thereafter approached the High Court by filing a petition under Section 482 of the Cr.PC seeking quashing of the proceedings. The primary ground urged before the High Court was that the appellant had admittedly converted to Christianity and was working as a Pastor for about ten years, and therefore, in view of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, he could not legally claim the status of a Scheduled Caste so as to invoke the provisions of the SC/ST Act.

Hon’ble High Court quashed the entire criminal proceedings

11) Vide impugned judgment dated 30.04.2025, the High Court had quashed the entire criminal proceedings in Spl. SC No. 36 of 2021 qua respondent nos. 2 to 7, holding inter alia that the appellant cannot claim protection under the SC/ST Act since he had been openly professing Christianity and working as a Pastor for about a decade. The High Court was of the view that caste system is not recognised in Christianity and that a person who has converted and continues to actively work as a Pastor and profess Christianity, cannot, in law, claim protection under the SC/ST Act.

12) Further, the High Court noted that the statements of witnesses did not consistently support the appellant’s version of a large group assault, and only a limited corroboration was available for the alleged restraint and attack, the medical evidence showed only a simple injury sustained by the appellant. On an overall assessment, the High Court held that continuation of the criminal proceedings against respondent nos. 2 to 7 would amount to an abuse of the process of law.

Complainant preferred the present appeal

13) Aggrieved, the appellant has preferred the present Appeal challenging the quashing of proceedings against respondent Nos. 2 to 7 in Spl. SC No. 36 of 2021 arising out of FIR No. 08 of 2021.

Submission of parties

Submissions of the Appellant

The appellant contended that the High Court erred in quashing the proceedings because a prima facie case of physical assault, criminal intimidation, and caste-based insults had been established. Their primary legal argument was that caste is an identity determined by birth rather than faith; therefore, religious conversion does not erase the social disabilities or historical disadvantages attached to one’s original caste. To support this, the appellant relied on a state government order (G.O. Ms. No. 341) from 1977, which suggested that a change of religion should not bar Scheduled Caste individuals from receiving certain benefits.

Submissions of the Respondents

The respondents argued that the High Court’s decision was correct because the foundational requirement for invoking the SC/ST Act—the victim’s status as a bona fide SC/ST member—was absent. They highlighted that the appellant had been a practicing Pastor for over a decade, which constitutes “professing” a religion other than those permitted under Clause 3 of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950. Furthermore, they asserted that executive state orders cannot override Presidential Orders or expand the Scheduled Caste list, and since the appellant was an active Christian, he could not legally claim the statutory protections reserved for members of the Scheduled Castes.

Analysis

Question of law: Whether a person undergone religious conversion may avail statutory benefits as SC/ST?

25) Before considering the correctness of the High Court’s decision to quash the criminal proceedings against respondent nos. 2 to 7, it becomes necessary to first delineate the broader legal issue that arises, namely, the conditions under which a person, who has undergone religious conversion, may avail the statutory benefits granted to the members of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The clarification of this overarching principle is essential, as the resolution of the present controversy must rest upon its proper application.

Analysing authorities about SC/ST

Articles 341 and 342 of Constitution and its scope

26) To address the aforesaid issue, it is appropriate to state the authorities which talk about the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. Under the Constitution of India, 1950, Articles 341 and 342 enumerate about the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The relevant Articles are reproduced hereinbelow:

“341. Scheduled Castes.—(1) The President may with respect to any State or Union territory, and where it is a State, after consultation with the Governor thereof, by public notification, specify the castes, races or tribes or parts of or groups within castes, races or tribes which shall for the purposes of this Constitution be deemed to be Scheduled Castes in relation to that State8[or Union territory, as the case may be. (2) Parliament may by law include in or exclude from the list of Scheduled Castes specified in a notification issued under clause (1) any caste, race or tribe or part of or group within any caste, race or tribe, but save as aforesaid a notification issued under the said clause shall not be varied by any subsequent notification.

342. Scheduled Tribes.—(1) The President may with respect to any State or Union territory, and where it is a State, after consultation with the Governor thereof, by public notification, specify the tribes or tribal communities or parts of or groups within tribes or tribal communities which shall for the purposes of this Constitution be deemed to be Scheduled Tribes in relation to that State or Union territory, as the case may be.

(2) Parliament may by law include in or exclude from the list of Scheduled Tribes specified in a notification issued under clause (1) any tribe or tribal community or part of or group within any tribe or tribal community, but save as aforesaid a notification issued under the said clause shall not be varied by any subsequent notification.” 

Core of the provisions

27) The core object of the above provisions is to provide right for the purpose of affording protection to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes having regard to the backwardness they suffer. The question which is now required to be posed at the outset is what is a ‘tribe’?

Concept of Tribe discussed and explained

28) In State of Kerala vs. Chandramohan, a three-Judge Bench of this Court had the opportunity to discuss the concept of ‘tribe’ and its characteristics. The relevant observations are reproduced hereinbelow:

“4. The object of the said provision is to provide right for the purpose of grant of protection to the Scheduled Tribes having regard to the economic and educational backwardness wherefrom they suffer. For the aforementioned purpose only the President of India has been authorised to issue the notification to parts or groups within the tribes. It is not in dispute that the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950 made in terms of the aforementioned provisions is exhaustive. The question which is required to be posed at the outset is what is a tribe?

“Tribe has been defined as a social group of a simple kind, the members of which speak common dialect, have a single government and act together for such common purposes as warfare. Other typical characteristics include a common name, a contiguous territory, a relatively uniform culture or way of life and a tradition of common descent. Tribes are usually composed of a number of local communities e.g. bands, villages or neighbourhoods and are often aggregated in clusters of a higher order called nations. The term is seldom applied to societies that have achieved a strictly territorial organisation in large States but is usually confined to groups whose unity is based primarily upon a sense of extended kinship ties though it is no longer used for kin groups in the strict sense, such as clans.” (See Dr Gupta, Jai Prakash: The Customary Laws of the Munda & the Oraon.)

“Tribe in the Dictionary of Anthropology is defined as ‘a social group, usually with a definite area, dialect, cultural homogeneity, and unifying social organization. It may include several subgroups, such as sibs or villages. A tribe ordinarily has a leader and may have a common ancestor, as well as patron deity. The families or small communities making up the tribe are linked through economic, social, religious, family, or blood ties’.” (See Bhowmik, K.L.: Tribal India: A Profile in Indian Ethnology.)”

President’s order of Constitution (S.T) Order, 1950

29) Under clause (1) of Article 342, the President of India promulgated the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950, identifying the tribes and tribal communities recognised as “Scheduled Tribes” for different States and Union Territories. The said order is reproduced hereinbelow:

“Constitution (Scheduled Tribe) Order, 1950

1. This Order may be called the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950.

2. The Tribes or tribal communities, or parts of, or groups within, tribes or tribal communities, specified in Parts I to XXII of the Schedule to this Order shall, in relation to the States to which those Parts respectively relate, be deemed to be Scheduled Tribes so far as regards members thereof residents in the localities specified in relation to them respectively in those Parts of that Schedule.

3. Any reference in this Order to State or to a district or other territorial division thereof shall be construed as a reference to the State, district or other territorial division as constituted on the 1st day of May, 1976.”

30) A person can claim benefits under the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950 only if he/she continues to belong to that particular tribe in substance. If, due to conversion or long-term abandonment of tribal customs, his/her tribal identity is in doubt, that question becomes a factual matter to be determined at trial. In this regard, this Court in Chandramohan (supra) had observed:   

“16. Before a person can be brought within the purview of the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950, he must belong to a tribe. A person for the purpose of obtaining the benefits of the Presidential Order must fulfil the condition of being a member of a tribe and continue to be a member of the tribe. If by reason of conversion to a different religion a long time back, he/his ancestors have not been following the customs, rituals and other traits, which are required to be followed by the members of the tribe and even had not been following the customary laws of succession, inheritance, marriage etc. he may not be accepted to be a member of a tribe. In this case, it has been contended that the family of the victim had been converted about 200 years back and in fact the father of the victim married a woman belonging to a Roman Catholic, wherefrom he again became a Roman Catholic. The question, therefore, which may have to be gone into is as to whether the family continued to be a member of a Scheduled Tribe or not. Such a question can be gone into only during trial.” (emphasis supplied)

Once a person belonging to a scheduled tribe converts to another religion through passage of time the customs he followed as a tribe may fall  

31) From the above, it becomes clear, that once a person belonging to a Scheduled Tribe converts to another religion, ultimately through the passage of time, the customs, rituals and other traits of that particular tribe may fall into eclipse. If so, in such circumstance, it is proved that the person in question has completely renounced himself from the customs, rituals and other traits of his tribe, and has assimilated into the converted religion following the practices and customs of that particular religion, a reasonable inference can be drawn that such a person shall not be considered a part of the tribe.

What is caste? An in-depth review

32) Let us now pivot to the legal foundations of Scheduled Castes. The initial question which is required to be posed is what is a ‘caste’?

Caste are formed not only on religion but on community of functions

33) In C.M. Arumugam vs. S Rajagopal, a three-Judge Bench of this Court had the opportunity to discuss on the question: what is ‘caste’? The relevant observation is reproduced hereinbelow:

“10. But that immediately raises the question: what is a caste? When we speak of a caste, we do not mean to refer in this context to the four primary castes, but to the multiplicity of castes and sub-castes which disfigure the Indian social scene. “A caste”, as pointed out by the High Court of Madras in Coopoosami Chetty v. Duraisami Chetty [ILR 33 Mad 67] “is a voluntary association of persons for certain purposes”. It is a well defined yet fluctuating group of persons governed by their own rules and regulations for certain internal purposes. Sir H. Risley has shown in his book on People of India how castes are formed based not only on community of religion, but also on community of functions. It is also pointed out by Sankaran Nair, J. in Muthusami v. Masilamani [ILR 33 Mad 342 : 20 Mad LJ 49] :

“… a change in the occupation sometimes creates a new caste. A common occupation sometimes combines members of different castes into a distinct body which becomes a new caste. Migration to another place makes sometimes a new caste.”

A caste is more a social combination than a religious group. But since, as pointed out by Rajamannar, C.J., in G. Michael v. S. Venkateswaran [AIR 1952 Mad 474] ethics provides the standard for social life and it is founded ultimately on religious beliefs and doctrines, religion is inevitably mixed up with social conduct and that is why caste has become an integral feature of Hindu society. But from that it does not necessarily follow as an invariable rule that whenever a person renounces Hinduism and embraces another religious faith, he automatically ceases to be a member of the caste in which he was born and to which he belonged prior to his conversion. It is no doubt true, and there we agree with the Madras High Court in G. Michael case that the general rule is that conversion operates as an expulsion from the caste, or, in other words, the convert ceases to have any caste, because caste is predominantly a feature of Hindu society and ordinarily a person who ceases to be a Hindu would not be regarded by the other members of the caste as belonging to their fold. But ultimately it must depend on the structure of the caste and its rules and regulations whether a person would cease to belong to the caste on his abjuring Hinduism.” (emphasis supplied)

Constitution order of president

34) In exercise of powers conferred under clause (1) of Article 341 of the Constitution, the President issued the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) order, 1950. This Order specifies the castes deemed to be Scheduled Castes in relation to various States and Union territories. The said Order is reproduced hereinbelow:

“Constitution (Scheduled Caste) Order, 1950

1. This Order may be called the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950.

2. Subject to the provisions of this Order, the castes, races or tribes or parts of, or groups within, castes or tribes specified in Parts to [XXV] of the Schedule to this Order shall, in relation to the States to which those Parts respectively relate, be deemed to be Scheduled Castes so far as regards member thereof resident in the localities specified in relation to them in those Parts of that Schedule.

[3. Notwithstanding anything contained in paragraph 2, no person who professes a religion different from the Hindu, the Sikh or the Buddhist] religion shall be deemed to be a member of a Scheduled Caste.

[4. Any reference in this Order to a State or to a district or other territorial division thereof shall be construed as a reference to the State, district or other territorial division as constituted on the 1st day of May, 1976.” (emphasis supplied)

Whether a person is a member of S.C/S.T is a question of fact?

35) The question as to whether a person is a member of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe remains an absolute question of fact. In the instant case, the legislative history of Clause 3 of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 is of immense significance. As originally enacted in the year 1950, Clause 3 restricted Scheduled Caste status to persons professing the Hindu religion. It was subsequently amended in the year 1956 to include persons professing the Sikh religion. Later, in the year 1990, the provision was further extended to include persons professing the Buddhist religion. It is important to note that Christianity has not been included under this Order by any of these amendments.

36) A careful perusal of Clause 3 of Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 reveals that the term “professes” is of crucial significance. The clause excludes any person who professes a religion different from Hindu, Sikh or Buddhist from being deemed a member of a Scheduled Caste. It is, therefore, necessary to examine what constitutes to professing a religion.

Christianity does not recognise or incorporate the institution of caste

39) It may be observed that Christianity, by its very theological foundation, does not recognize or incorporate the institution of caste. The foundational Christian scripture, The New Testament states: There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.8 Christianity in India exists in several denominational forms: Roman Catholics (who adhere to liturgical traditions of the Latin Church), various Protestant denominations (including the Church of South India, Baptist, Lutheran, and Pentecostal churches), and the ancient Syrian Christian communities.

40) The aforesaid denominational distinctions arise from differences in theological interpretation, liturgical practice (the form of worship) and ecclesiastical governance (the organizational framework within the church). They do not represent any caste-based hierarchal stratifications.

Application of the above scenario in the present case

41) In the present case, the facts are unequivocal. The appellant has been serving as a Pastor for the past ten years. The appellant is also the treasurer of the Pastors fellowship in Pittalavanipalem. The evidence further reveals that the appellant conducted prayer meetings on Sundays at the residence of one Doma Koti Reddy in Kohapalem Village, and regularly performed pastoral duties including preaching and conducting religious services for the Christian congregation.

A pastor professing Christian faith, preaching the gospel, comes within the meaning of clause 3 of the Constitution (SC) Order, 1950

42) A pastor occupies a position of religious leadership within the Christian faith, entrusted with the responsibility of preaching the gospel and conducting religious services in accordance with the Christian doctrine. The appellant’s occupation and conduct over this extended period constitute an open and public declaration of his Christian faith. Viewing through the lens of Punjabrao (supra), the appellant indubitably professes Christianity within the meaning of Clause 3 of the Constitution (Scheduled Caste) Order, 1950.

43) It is an admitted fact that the appellant previously belonged to the Madiga community, which is specified at Serial No. 32 in Part I (Andhra Pradesh) of the Schedule to the Constitution (Scheduled Caste) Order, 1950, and is recognized as a Scheduled Caste. Had the appellant continued to profess Hinduism, his status as a member of the Scheduled Caste would have been beyond question. However, the appellant now professes Christianity.

44) Clause 3 of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 is categorical and unambiguous in its terms. It provides that notwithstanding anything contained in Clause 2, no person who professes a religion different from Hindu, Sikh, or Buddhist shall be deemed to be a member of a Scheduled Caste. The appellant professes Christianity, which is not among the three religions specified in Clause 3. Irrespective of the appellant’s caste of origin, he cannot be deemed to be a member of a Scheduled Caste. However, the learned counsel for the appellant has sought to challenge this position by placing reliance on certain State Government Orders.

47) More significantly, Clause 3 of the State Government Order is unambiguous and unequivocal. It states that statutory concessions, including reservations in educational institutions and public services, are applicable only to Scheduled Castes with reference to the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950. The clause categorically states that Scheduled Caste converts to Christianity and Buddhism “will not therefore be eligible for these facilities”. The Government Order thus explicitly recognizes and reaffirms the position embodied in Clause 3 of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, which restricts Scheduled Caste status to persons professing Hindu, Sikh, or Buddhist religion.

SC/ST Act was framed to protect the rights and dignity of SC and ST in India

48) The SC/ST Act is a statutory enactment of the Parliament of India. The Act serves as a crucial legal framework to protect the rights and dignity of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in India, ensuring stringent measures against offences of atrocities and promoting their welfare and security. The inapplicability of G.O.Ms No. 341 issued by the State to such central enactments has been authoritatively clarified by the Central Government itself.

Treating a member of SC/ST as a Hindu and a converted is explained

51) To further appreciate our discussion on the issue raised, it is necessary to refer to some of the decisions of this Court which had addressed the same questions. In C.M. Arumugam (supra), a three-Judge Bench of this Court had observed as follows:

“17. ….It is the orthodox Hindu society still dominated to a large extent, particularly in rural areas, by medievalistic outlook and status-oriented approach which attaches social and economic disabilities to a person belonging to a scheduled caste and that is why certain favoured treatment is given to him by the Constitution. Once such a person ceases to be a Hindu and becomes a Christian, the social and economic disabilities arising because of Hindu religion cease and hence it is no longer necessary to give him protection and for this reason he is deemed not to belong to a scheduled caste….” (emphasis supplied)  

Considering the previous judgments on the Madiga caste and reservation after converting to Christianity

52) Thereafter, in Guntur Medical College vs. Y Mohan Rao, a Constitution Bench of this Court had discussed in detail the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950. The observations made by the Court are as follows:

“The President in exercise of the power conferred upon him under Article 341 has issued the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950. Paras (2) and (3) of this Order are material and they read as follows:

“2. Subject to the provisions of this Order, the castes, races or tribes or parts of or groups within caste or tribes specified in Part I to XIII of the Schedule to this Order shall, in relation to the States to which these parts respectively relate, be deemed to be scheduled castes so far as regards members thereof resident in the localities specified in relation to them in those Parts of that Schedule.

3. Notwithstanding anything contained in para 2, no person who professes a religion different from the Hindu or the Sikh religion shall be deemed to be a member of a Scheduled Caste.”

The schedule to this order in Part I sets out the castes, races or tribes or parts of or groups within castes or tribes which shall in the different areas of the State of Andhra Pradesh be deemed to be scheduled castes. One of the castes specified there is Madiga caste and that caste must, therefore, be deemed to be a scheduled caste. But by reason of clause (3), a person belonging to Madiga caste would not be deemed to be a member of a scheduled caste unless he professes Hindu or Sikh religion at the relevant time. It is not necessary that he should have been born a Hindu or a Sikh. The only thing required is that he should at a material time be professing Hindu or Sikh religion.” (emphasis supplied)

Question of reservation benefits after converting to Christianity

54) Before we further deal with this aspect, it would be apposite to refer to a recent decision of this Court in C. Selvarani vs. The Special Secretarycum-District Collector and Others, wherein a Division Bench was adjudicating the claim of a person seeking reservation benefits, available to Scheduled Castes, after conversion to Christianity. The relevant portion of the said decision is as follows:

“38. At this juncture, we may observe that India is a secular country. Every citizen has a right to practise and profess a religion of their choice as guaranteed under Article 25 of the Constitution. One converts to a different religion, when he/she is 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 on the other religion, the same cannot be permitted, as the extension of benefits of reservation to people with such ulterior motive will only defeat the social ethos of the policy of reservation.

39. In the instant case, the evidence presented clearly demonstrates that the appellant professes Christianity and actively practices the faith by attending church regularly. Despite the same, she claims to be a Hindu and seeks for Scheduled Caste community certificate for the purpose of employment. Such a dual claim made by her is untenable and she cannot continue to identify herself as a Hindu after baptism. Therefore, the conferment of Scheduled Caste communal status to the appellant, who is a Christian by religion, but claims 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.” (emphasis supplied)

POSTULATES

55) Upon a cumulative reading of the aforesaid discussion and in the light of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 and Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950, the following principles emerge for determining the entitlement of a person to be recognised as a member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe:

a) The claimant must demonstrably belong to a caste or tribe which is specifically notified and recognised under Clause 2 of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 and Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950, and such status must be established by clear, cogent, and unimpeachable evidence.

b) No person who professes a religion other than Hindu, Sikh or Buddhist shall be deemed to be a member of a Scheduled Caste. This bar under Clause 3 of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 is categorical and absolute. Conversion to any religion not specified in Clause 3 results in immediate and complete loss of Scheduled Caste status from the moment of conversion regardless of birth.

c) No statutory benefit, protection, reservation, or entitlement under the Constitution or under any enactment of Parliament or State Legislature that is predicated upon the membership of a Scheduled Caste can be claimed by or extended to any person who, by operation of Clause 3 of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, is not deemed to be a member of a Scheduled Caste. This bar is absolute and admits no exception.

d) A person cannot simultaneously profess and practice a religion other than the ones specified in Clause 3 of Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 and claim membership of a Scheduled Caste at the same time. A person who professes and practices such religion for personal, social and spiritual purposes cannot in law, assert membership of a Scheduled Caste for the purpose of securing statutory benefits. The two positions are mutually exclusive and contrary to the Constitutional scheme.

e) In cases where a person claims to have reconverted from a religion not specified in Clause 3 of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 back to Hindu, Sikh or Buddhist religion, the following three conditions must be cumulatively and conclusively established:

i. There must be a clear proof that the person originally belonged to a caste notified under the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950.

ii. There must be credible and unimpeachable evidence of bona fide reconversion to the original religion, accompanied by complete and unequivocal renunciation of the religion to which conversion had taken place, total dissociation therefrom, and actual adoption and observance of the customs, usages, practices, rituals, and religious obligations of the original caste.

iii. There must be satisfactory and credible evidence establishing acceptance and assimilation by the members of the original caste and the concerned community. Mere self-proclamation is insufficient i.e., the community must recognize and accept the person as one of their own.

All the above three conditions are mandatory and cumulative. The burden of proving reconversion lies entirely on the claimant, to be proven through unimpeachable evidence. Failure to establish even one condition renders the claim unsustainable.

f) Where a person ceases to be a member of a Scheduled Caste by virtue of Clause 3 of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, the loss of such status carries with it the automatic and immediate termination of all eligibility for statutory benefits, protections, reservations, preferences and entitlements that are predicated upon or flow from such membership.

g) With respect to Scheduled Tribes, this Court clarifies that unlike the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950 does not prescribe religion-based exclusion. The determination of Scheduled Tribe status, therefore, cannot rest on conversion alone, but must turn on whether the claimant continues to possess and is recognised for the essential attributes of tribal identity, including customary practices, social organisation, community life, and acceptance by the concerned tribal community. Where conversion or subsequent conduct results in a complete severance from the tribal way of life and loss of community recognition, the foundational basis for Scheduled Tribes status will stand eroded. Conversely, where such attributes demonstrably subsist or are genuinely re-established and accepted by the tribal community, the claim cannot be rejected mechanically. The assessment in such cases is necessarily fact-specific and is left to the competent authority to decide in accordance with Constitutional principles.

56) Reverting to the facts of the present case, it is not in dispute that the appellant was originally born into the Madiga community of Scheduled Caste. It is equally undisputed that he subsequently embraced Christianity. The submission advanced on behalf of the appellant that he continues to retain his Scheduled Caste status by birth notwithstanding such conversion cannot be accepted. When the postulates enunciated hereinabove are applied to the facts at hand, it becomes manifest that for a person to be recognised as a member of a Scheduled Caste, he must be professing the Hindu religion or such other religions as are expressly recognised under the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950. Once the appellant converted to Christianity, the caste status, which he earlier enjoyed as a member of the Madiga community, stood eclipsed in the eyes of law.

Present case appellant did not prove that he revert back to the Madiga community

57) In the present case, it is not the case of the appellant that at any stage, he had reconverted from Christianity to his original religion or has been accepted back into the fold of the Madiga community. On the contrary, the evidence on record unmistakably establishes that the appellant continues to profess Christianity and has been functioning as a Pastor for more than a decade, conducting regular Sunday prayer meetings in different houses of the village. It is also an admitted position that at the time of the alleged incident, the appellant was conducting prayer meeting as a Pastor at the house of one Doma Koti Reddy. These concurrent facts leave no room for doubt that the appellant continues to remain a Christian on the date of the occurrence.

59) From the above, it is clear that the administrative action of the State in providing the caste certificate to the appellant cannot be in disharmony with the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950. In the present case, we have no hesitation in holding that the appellant, having ceased to be a member of the Madiga community upon his conversion to Christianity and having failed to establish any subsequent reconversion, does not satisfy the mandatory Constitutional requirement for claiming the status of Scheduled Caste.

WHETHER THE HIGH COURT WAS RIGHT IN QUASHING PROCEEDINGS AGAINST RESPONDENT NOS. 2 TO 7?

The claim of the presence of a large unlawful assembly is unsupported by the chargesheet or other witnesses

66) The allegations of wrongful restraint, hurt and criminal intimidation rest solely on the statement of the appellant, with no independent witness attributing any specific overt act to respondent nos. 2 to 7. LW-2 was admittedly not present at the scene, while LW-3 and LW-4, though referring to an altercation, stated that the situation was pacified and the appellant was escorted away. Their version does not support any allegation of restraint, assault or threat. The claim regarding the presence of a large unlawful assembly is unsupported by the chargesheet or other witnesses, thereby weakening the case of a concerted act under Section 34 of the IPC. LW-9, who accompanied the appellant, also does not allege any assault, restraint or intimidation; her subsequent statements are hearsay in nature. Moreover, absence of consistent ocular testimony identifying the assailants or manner of occurrence, does not advance the prosecution’s case.

67) Thus, we are of the view that the basic foundation in respect of allegations of wrongful restraint, causing hurt and criminal intimidation are not present in the material collected during investigation.

68) In Bhajan Lal (supra) and recently in Neeharika Infrastructure Private Limited vs. State of Maharashtra, this Court has clearly held that where the uncontroverted allegations and the evidence collected during investigation do not disclose the commission of any offence, continuation of criminal proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of law.

Conclusion

High Court is right in quashing the proceedings

69) We are of the view that the High Court, upon a careful and correct appreciation of the material on record, arrived at the conclusion that the allegations under Sections 341, 506 and 323 read with Section 34 of the IPC are not borne out even if the prosecution’s case is taken at its face value.

Appeal dismissed

70) In view of the above analysis, we find no substance in the Appeal which fails and is hereby dismissed.         

Resources

Judgments involved, cited, or quoted

Primary Judgments Cited

• State of Kerala vs. Chandramohan (2004) 3 SCC 429: Cited to define the concept of a “tribe” and its characteristics, such as common dialect, cultural homogeneity, and the requirement to continue following tribal customs to maintain status.
• C.M. Arumugam vs. S. Rajagopal (1976) 1 SCC 863: A three-judge bench decision quoted to define “caste” as a social combination rather than a purely religious group, and to explain that conversion to Christianity generally results in the loss of Scheduled Caste status.
• Guntur Medical College vs. Y. Mohan Rao (1976) 3 SCC 411: A Constitution Bench decision cited to clarify that a person must profess the Hindu, Sikh, or Buddhist religion at the “material time” to be deemed a member of a Scheduled Caste.
• M. Chandra vs. M. Thangamuthu and Another (2010) 9 SCC 712: Cited to reinforce the rule that Scheduled Caste status is dependent on professing one of the religions specified in the Presidential Order.
• C. Selvarani vs. The Special Secretary-cum-District Collector and Others 2024 INSC 900: A recent decision quoted to emphasize that claiming Scheduled Caste status while actively practicing Christianity for the purpose of reservation is untenable and constitutes a “fraud on the Constitution”.
• K.P. Manu vs. Scrutiny Committee for Verification of Community Certificate (2015) 4 SCC 1: Cited for the “three mandatory tests” required to establish a claim for a caste certificate, particularly in cases of reconversion.
• State of Haryana vs. Bhajan Lal 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335: Cited for the established legal parameters and categories of cases where the High Court should exercise its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.PC to quash criminal proceedings.
• Neeharika Infrastructure Private Limited vs. State of Maharashtra (2021) 19 SCC 401: Cited to support the principle that continuing criminal proceedings when evidence does not disclose an offence amounts to an abuse of the process of law.

Other Legal References and Quoted Authorities

• High Court of Andhra Pradesh Judgment (30.04.2025): The impugned judgment in Criminal Petition No. 7114 of 2022, which originally quashed the proceedings against the respondents.
• Coopoosami Chetty v. Duraisami Chetty (ILR 33 Mad 67): Quoted within C.M. Arumugam regarding the definition of caste as a voluntary association.
• Muthusami v. Masilamani (ILR 33 Mad 342): Quoted regarding how changes in occupation or migration can create new castes.
• G. Michael v. S. Venkateswaran (AIR 1952 Mad 474): Quoted regarding the relationship between religion, ethics, and social conduct in the Hindu caste system.
• Punjabrao vs. D.P. Meshram (1964) SCC OnLine SC 76: Cited to interpret the term “profess” in the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, as making an “open declaration” of faith.
• Karwadi v. Shambharkar (AIR 1958 Bom 296): Referenced within the Punjabrao citation regarding the meaning of entering publicly into a religious state.

Acts and Sections Involved

Sections in the present FIR

The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989

• Section 3(1)(r): Relating to intentional insult or intimidation with intent to humiliate a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe in any place within public view.
• Section 3(1)(s): Relating to abusing any member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe by caste name in any place within public view.
• Section 3(2)(va): Relating to offences specified in the Schedule committed against a person or property, knowing that such person is a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe.

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC)

• Section 323: Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt.
• Section 341: Punishment for wrongful restraint.
• Section 506: Punishment for criminal intimidation.
• Section 34: Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention (applied in conjunction with the above sections).

Procedural Laws involved

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.PC)

• Section 482: Saving of inherent powers of the High Court. This was the provision used by the High Court to quash the criminal proceedings, a decision upheld by the Supreme Court in this judgment.

Constitution of India, 1950

• Article 341: Power of the President to specify Scheduled Castes and the power of Parliament to include or exclude groups from the list.
• Article 342: Power of the President to specify Scheduled Tribes.
• Article 366 (24) & (25): Definitions of “Scheduled Castes” and “Scheduled Tribes”.
• Article 25: Freedom of conscience and free profession, practice, and propagation of religion (referenced in cited case law).

Presidential Orders

• Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950: Specifically Clause 3, which stipulates that no person who professes a religion different from Hinduism, Sikhism, or Buddhism shall be deemed to be a member of a Scheduled Caste.
• Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950: Analyzed to clarify that, unlike the SC Order, it does not contain a religion-based exclusion clause.

Party

Chinthada Anand vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and Others - Criminal Appeal No. 1580 of 2026 - 2026 INSC 283 - March 24, 2026 - Hon'ble Mr. Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manmohan.