Allahabad High Court Orders Probe Into Misuse of SC Certificates After Religious Conversion
The Allahabad High Court in Jitendra Sahani v. State of UP and another has directed all District Magistrates in Uttar Pradesh to examine cases where people who convert from Hinduism to another religion may still be using Scheduled Caste (SC) or similar category certificates. The Court said this must be checked carefully and any lapses should be reported to the State government within four months to prevent “fraud on the Constitution.”
Justice Praveen Kumar Giri also asked the Union Cabinet Secretary and the Chief Secretary of Uttar Pradesh to review issues related to SCs, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes. The Principal Secretary of the Minorities Welfare Department and the Additional Chief Secretary of the Social Welfare Department were also instructed to ensure proper enforcement of the law.
These directions came after the Court noticed that a man, who had reportedly converted from Hinduism to Christianity, submitted an affidavit mentioning his religion as ‘Hindu’.
The Court observed that under the Constitution (Scheduled Caste) Order, 1950, a person from any community other than Hindu, Sikh or Buddhist cannot be considered a Scheduled Caste. It also referred to a recent Supreme Court judgment which held that using caste-based benefits after religious conversion amounts to a fraud on the Constitution. The Court further noted an Andhra Pradesh High Court ruling stating that caste-based discrimination does not exist within Christianity, so the basis for SC status does not continue after conversion.
The Court has now ordered a probe into the petitioner’s actual religion. The District Magistrate of Maharajganj has been asked to complete the inquiry within three months and take strict action if any forgery is found.
The petitioner, Jitendra Sahani, had approached the Court seeking to quash a criminal case filed against him under Sections 153A and 295A of the Indian Penal Code. The allegations claimed he attempted to convert people to Christianity and used insulting words for Hindu deities.
His counsel argued that he had prior permission from the Sub-Divisional Magistrate to preach on his own land, though the permission was later withdrawn.
The High Court refused to quash the FIR, stating that it cannot evaluate evidence at this stage. It clarified that the petitioner may approach the trial court with a discharge application and raise all his legal objections.
Advocates Vandana Henry and Patsy David appeared for the petitioner, while Additional Government Advocate Pankaj Tripathi represented the State.
