'Fraud on Constitution': SC slams religious conversion for quota benefits
What's the story
The Supreme Court of India has rejected a woman's claim for Scheduled Caste (SC) benefits, calling her religious conversion a "fraud on the Constitution."
Justices Pankaj Mithal and R. Mahadevan said that if the intention of conversion/reconversion is just to benefit from reservation, it cannot be allowed because it undermines the objective of allocating quotas to socially backward people.
Certificate denial
Court upholds denial of SC certificate to Selvarani
"The extension of benefits of reservation to people with such ulterior motives will only defeat the social ethos of the policy of reservation...it would amount to fraud on the Constitution," the bench stated.
The observation came while upholding a previous Madras High Court decision denying one C Selvarani an SC certificate.
Born to a Hindu father and a Christian mother and baptized as a Christian, Selvarani identified as Hindu to apply for an upper-division clerk position in Puducherry in 2015.
Evidence requirement
Court highlights need for evidence of reconversion
The court observed that despite claiming to be Hindu, Selvarani regularly practiced Christianity and attended church services.
It noted that those who convert to Christianity forfeit their caste identity.
To reclaim SC status, they need to furnish concrete evidence of reconversion and acceptance by their original caste community.
In Selvarani's case, there was no credible proof of reconversion to Hinduism, like public declarations or ceremonies.
Her continued adherence to Christian practices invalidated her claim, the court found.
Argument dismissal
Court dismisses Selvarani's argument on caste identity
"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," the apex court said.
The bench also stressed that dual claims on religion are untenable, saying, "One converts to a different religion when genuinely inspired by its principles."