Religion conversion fraud to take advantage of reservation, big decision of Supreme Court

New Delhi: The Supreme Court said in an important decision that converting religion just to get the benefit of reservation is against the basic spirit of the Constitution. The Supreme Court upheld the decision of the Madras High Court in which a Scheduled Caste (SC) certificate was refused to a Christian woman. This woman wanted SC certificate for the job of Upper Division Clerk (UDC) in Puducherry. For this he/she had declared himself a Hindu.

Decision on Christian woman’s petition

Justice Pankaj Mittal and Justice R. Mahadevan’s bench said that the woman follows Christianity and goes to church regularly. Despite this, she is claiming to be a Hindu and Scheduled Caste for the job. Such double claim is not right. The bench said that giving SC status to a person who is a Christian but describes himself as a Hindu for reservation is against the purpose of reservation. This is a betrayal of the Constitution.

Refusal to give SC certificate to Christian woman

The court said that this case is related to the bigger question in which the hearing is going on on the constitutionality of making religion the basis for SC/ST reservation. In this, reservation has been demanded for Christian and Muslim Dalits. According to the Presidential Order of 1950, only Hindus can get SC status. Sikhs and Buddhists are also considered Hindus for reservation. In 2007, the Justice Ranganath Mishra Commission had recommended giving SC reservation to Dalit Christians and Muslims.
After the defeat in Maharashtra, Congress is on the back foot, every move of Rahul failed, will its claim in India be weak?

What did Justice Mahadevan say

Justice Mahadevan said that India is a secular country. Under Article 25, every citizen has the right to practice the religion of his/her choice. A person joins another religion when he/she is influenced by its principles and ideas. But if the purpose of religious conversion is only to avail the benefits of reservation, then it cannot be allowed. Giving reservation to such people will defeat the social objective of the reservation policy.

What is the matter related to the female petitioner?

Petitioner C. Selvarani had challenged the order dated January 24, 2023 of the Madras High Court. The High Court had rejected his/her petition. Selvarani said she practiced Hinduism and belonged to the Valluvan caste, which comes under the Constitution (Puducherry) Scheduled Castes Order of 1964. Therefore, she is entitled to reservation under Adi Dravidian quota. Selvarani argued that she follows Hindu religion since birth and goes to temples and worships Hindu deities.

What things are mentioned in the Christian woman’s claim?

The woman tried to prove in the court through several documents that she was born to a Hindu father and Christian mother. After marriage his/her mother also converted to Hinduism. his/her grandparents and great-grandparents belonged to the Valluvan caste. She also claimed that throughout her educational life, she was considered to belong to the SC community. his/her transfer certificate also confirms his/her caste. his/her father and brother have SC certificates.

The bench mentioned the facts related to the case

However, the bench, after studying the facts of the case, said that the report of the Village Administrative Officer and documentary evidence clearly showed that her father belonged to the SC community and her mother was a Christian. They were married according to Christian rituals. After this, Selvarani’s father converted to Christianity by getting baptized. his/her brother was baptized on May 7, 1989. Selvarani was born on 22 November 1990 and baptized on 6 January 1991 at the Lourdes Shrine in Villianur, Puducherry. Therefore, it is clear that Selvarani was a Christian by birth and she is not entitled for an SC certificate.

That’s why the woman’s petition was rejected

The bench said that if Selvarani and her family really wanted to convert, they should have taken some concrete steps to prove it, instead of just claiming to be Hindus. One way of religious conversion is through Arya Samaj. The conversion could also be announced publicly. Along with this, the Supreme Court rejected the woman’s argument that she was baptized when she was less than three months old.

‘There is no evidence that the Christian woman converted to Hinduism’

The court said that this argument does not seem correct to us because it did not make any attempt to cancel the registration of baptism nor did it file any case in this regard. The court said investigation revealed that her parents were married under the Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872. Selvarani and her brother were baptized and attended church regularly. There is no evidence that he/she re-converted to Hinduism. On the upside, the fact is that they still practice Christianity.