KAILASH SONKAR SMT. MAYA DEVI December 16, 1983
~[S. Murtaza Fazat Aut, R.B. Misra AND M.P. THAKKAR, JJ. Hindu law— Whether a Hindu on conversion to another religion loses the original ~ caste. Convertee loses caste unless new religion accepts caste system and permits convertee to retain his: original caste and family laws. During conversion original - caste remains under eclipse—Ecliyse Disappears an reconversion to original religion.
On reconversion to. old religion — Whether’ the original caste revives Factors which determine revival of original caste.
Representation of the People Act—Person born of Christian parents—Educated and known as Christian—Reconverted to Hinduism voluntarily—Married a- member ’ of scheduled caste—Performed shudhikaran’ ceremony—Accepted and welcomed by meinbers of that community as scheduled caste—Whether such person can contest state assembly élection as member o scheduled caste from constituency reserved 7 fo® members of scheduled castes. , ,
In the nomination’ papers filed by the respondent: for contesting legislative assembly elections in May, 1980 from a constituency which was reserved for sche- - ”
duled castes, she described herself as belonging to the scheduled caste ‘Katia’. Several persons raised objection that the respondent, being a‘ Christian by birth, could not bé-treafed as a member of the scheduled caste. The Returning Officer
_ fejected the objection and accepted her nomination papers. ‘The respondent won ~
. the election defeating the appellant. The appellant having unsuccessfully challenged the election of the respondent in the High Court, alleged in this appeal that the respondent after being born 4 Christian was baptised according to-Christian rites; her mother’s name was Elizabeth; -her marriage with Jai Prakash Shalwar, .
who belonged, to Katia caste, was not valid and even on marriage her caste could not revive because caste was determined not by marriage but by birth. The res- ‘pondent stated that she was never a Christian nor was she borna Christian. She also averred that even her father or mother were not Christians. On the other hand, she always remained a member of the Katia caste and was accepted as such by the members of that community because her marriage with Jai Prakash Shalwar’
was petformed according to Hindu rites of Aryasamaj sect and was attended by a number of members of her caste and due publicity was given to the marriage.
_ “Dismissing the appeal,
. HELD : It cannot be said that at the tine when the respondent filed her nomination papers, she was not a member of the Katia caste. [199 G)
A caste to which a Hindu belongs is essentially determined by birth and: if a Hindu is converted to Christianity or any other religion which does not:recognise
—"
|. KAILASH SONKAR Y. MAYA pEvYI 177 caste, the conversion amounts toa loss of the said caste. Tn considering whether
. on conversion the loss of the caste is absolute, irrevocable so as ‘not to revive under any circumstance | the guiding -principles are : (a) Where a person’ belonging to a scheduled’ caste in converted to Christianity or, Islam, the ‘same involves loss of the caste unless the religion to “which he is converted is ‘liberat enough to permit the convertec to retain his caste or the family: laws by which he was originally
‘ governed, There area number of cases.where members belonging toa particular . caste having been converted to Christianity or even to islam retained their caste - or family laws and despite the new Order they were permitted to be governed by their old laws. But this can happen only if the new religion is liberal and tolerant enough to permit-such a course of action, and (b) In all other cases, conversion to ‘Christianity or Islam or any.other religion which does not accept the caste a loss of caste on, conver.
system and insists on relinquishing the caste, ahere isa sion. [190 C-F; 191 B]
The norms and conditions under which a caste could -revive on reconversion to the old religion as laid down by the authorities of the High Courts and this Court - 2re ; (1) where the convertce exhibits by his actions and behaviour his cle#r inten- tion of abjuring the new réligion on his.own volition without any persuasion and
_ ts not motivated by any benefit or gain, (2) where the community of the old order to which the convertee originally belonged is gracious enongh to admit him to:
the original caste either expressly or by ‘necessary intendihent, cand (3) Rules of the new Order in permitting the convertee to join (he new: caste. “Unless the aforesaid conditions are fulfilled the loss of caste on ‘conversion is complete. and cannot
: he revived. But. having regard to. the present set-up and the circumstances pre- .
vaiting in ou@modern society, it wil! be difficult to Insist on the second condition, viz., the insistence on the members of the community of the’ caste to admit thé.
convertee on reconversion :to the original, caste because such a course of action may lead to dangerous consequence. and. ill-concieved exploitation. {191 C-G]
6. M. Arumugam v. S. Rajagopal & Ors., [1976] 3 S.C.R. 823 Sacred Books:
of the East (Vol) VIII) by F. Max Muller; Charlotte Abraham and Daniel Vincent Abraham y, Francis Abrahani, 9 M.LA. 199: Chaturbhuj Vithaldas Jasani y. Moresh- war Parashram &-Ors., [1954] S.C.R: 817;-S. Anbalalagn'v. B. Devarajan &* Ors., ,
[1984] LS.C.R. Goona Durgaprasada Rao &.Anr. v. Goona Sudarsanaswami. & Ors.,
-ELR 1940 Madras 653; G. Michael y. S. Venkateswaran, ‘AIR 1952 Madras 474;
Dippala Suri Dora y, V.V. Girt ATR 1958 A.P, 724; - Wilson Reade v. C.S. Booth & Ors. AIR 1958.Assam 128; and B. Shyamsunder v. Shankar Deo Vedalankar & Ors., AIR (1960. Mysore, 27 referred: to. wo
‘s. Rajagopal v. C.M, Armugam & Ors., , [1969] 1 S.CR. 254, distinguished. —
The, main test for determining the revival of the original caste on reconversion
‘should be a genuine intention of the reconvert to abjure his view religion’ and com- * pletely dissociate himself from it. Tt may be added here that this’ does not mean ° that the reconversion should be only a ruse ora pretext or a cover to ‘gain mundane _
‘ worldly benefits so that the ‘reconversion becomes me rely'a show for achieving a - ‘particular purpose’ whercas the real intention may be shrouded in mystery. The.
reconvert must exhibit a clear and genuine intention to go back to his.old fold and adopt the customs and practices of the said fold without any protest frony members of his erstwhile caste. [192 C-E]° ; ' Ganpat v. Returning Officer & Ors., [1975] 2 S.C.R. 923, referred to. © ve
H.
,
178 a ‘SUPREME couRr REPORTS o 1984] 2.0. 7
‘ ’
. When a child is born neither has he‘an: religion nor is he capable of chodsing
-one until he reaches the age of discretion and acquires proper understanding of the situation. Hence, the mere fact that the parents of a child, who were Christians, would i in ordinaty course get. the usual baptism certificate and perform other ceremonies Without the child knowing what is being done but after the child has grown by what his parents may have done. Therefore, in such cases, it is the intention of the convertee which would determine the revival of the caste,” If by his clear up and becomes fuilly mature and able to decide his future, he ought not to.be bound © and conclusive conduct the- person reconverts to his old faith and abjures the new =’ . teligion in unequivocal terrhs his caste automatically revives. [192 G oH; 193 Aj
Another dominant factor to determine the revival of the-caste of a convert from Christianity to his old religion would be that in cases of election to the State
_Assemblies or the Parliament where under the Presidential Order a particular © constituency is reserved for.a member of the scheduled caste or tribe and ‘the’ ‘electorate gives a majority verdict in his favour, then this woul. be ddubtless proof positive of the fact that-his community has accepted him back to his old fold and this would result in’é revival of the original . caste to. which. the said, candidate . : _ belonged. [193 B-C] ;
“When a person is. converted to Christianity or some other religion the original
" caste remains under eclipse and as soon as during his/her life-time the person is “reconverted to the or iginal religion the eclipse disappears and the caste e automatically revives. . [193 DI. .
Whether or not the revival of the caste depends on the will and’ ‘discretion.’
‘of the members of the community of the caste is a- question on which we refrain from giving any: opinion because in the instant case there is overwhelming evidence
“to show that the respondent was accepted by the community of her original ‘Katia |
_ caste. Even so, if the.fact of the acceptance. by ‘the members of the community is * made condition precedent ‘to the revival of ‘the caste, it would lead ‘to grave
‘ consequences and unnetessary exploitation, sometimes motivated ‘by political _
- considerations. Of course, if: apart fron the oral views of . the community there is
_any tecognised documentary proof of a custom or code of conduct’ or rule of law binding ona particular caste, it may be necessary to, insist on the consent of the __ members of the community otherwise in normal circumstancés the caste would “revive by applying. ‘the principles of doctrine of eclipse. Jt may be added that “where it appears that the person reconyerted to the old religion had been converted
- to Christianity since several generations, it may be difficult to apply, the doctrine.
‘of eclipse to the revival of caste. {193 D-G]
In the instant case, on a full and complete appraisal of the oral and documentary evidence, ‘the following conclusions are inevitable: (1) that the res- pondent was born of Christian .parents and was‘educated in various schools or — institutions where she was known.as-a Christian; (2) that 3-4 years before the
-‘election, the respondent was‘ reconverted to Hindusim voluntarily and married — Yai Prakash Shalwar, a. member of the Katia Caste, and also performed the shudhi- -
- karan ceremony; (3). that she was not only accepted: but’also welcomed by the ‘important members, ‘including the President and_ Vice-President, of the communify; (4) there is no evidence to show that there was any bar under the Christian religion which could have prevented her from reconyerting herself to Hinduism; and (5) that:
te
—#
.. KAILASH SONKAR vy, MAYA DEW (Fazal Ali, J.) °> 179 there was no evidence to show that even Ner ‘parents had been Christians from generation to generation. {n these circumstances, therefore, this case fulfils ‘the ” conditions required for being reconverted to Hinduism from. Christianity in order to’ revive the original caste. [198 G-H; 199 A- DI me, .
~CIvIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION | Civil Appeal No. 3) 18 of - 1981,
From the J “Judgment and Order dated the 25th September, 1981° 7 of the Madhya Pradesh High . Court in Election Petition No. ‘2 of 1980. : .
UR. Lali and A, K. Sanghi for the Api, LG, B Pai and Vineet Kumar, for ihe Respondent, The fidement of the e Court was delivered by
—FAZAL Ail, b. “By o our ‘Order dated October 20,.1983, we. had dismissed the appeal. “We now proceed to give our reasons for the . .
"same,
«The victory: of our long drawn struggle for freedom from: the. | British. yoke came to us after one and a half century. of perpetual: and constant efforts soaked in-cold blood and dipped in supreme
. Sacrifice. The ‘historical midnight of August 15, 1947, which ushered “in a now era, was merely a completion of a phase and not the end ‘of © an epoch: but only, the beginning of. the end.
Soon theréafter the wise wizards’ and the founding. fathers of . our Constitution: set out to devote their wholehearted attention’ to dovis2, way; and means to give to our sub- continent a- solid © and
“comorehz nsive Constitution: .which’ ‘may solvé multifarious aed manifold difficulties, fulfil the burning needs of the nation and sort out complex and comilicated problems which. arose after our hardwon freedom ‘which must have. baffled our leaders.’ There was the . - question of achieving a secular democracy, the largest in the world, based on a sdcialist* pattern which-would take care of all sorts and “kinds of. pzople having different cultuiés,: languages -and ‘religions; ‘to confer and guarantee fundamental rights of citizens through man- datory provisions, to lay down directive principles - of ‘State, Policy
_. Which were to be the guiding spirit of the Constitution, the ’ question , of achieving, agrarian reforms by displicing the old British bureaucratic system and substituting a new order, the issue of reconciling | the °
_irreconciliable and various other thorny and tricky matters. One ;
me
«i!
‘180. .- SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1984] 2 s.c.R,
"of the important objectives to be translated into action was to take” special care of the backward classes, members of the scheduled castes A and tribes by bringing them to the fore through pragfnatic reforms .
_ and providing adequate opportunities for their amelioration and development, education, employment and the like,
As Mahatrha Gandhi, father of the nation, said ‘India. lives in villages” and so do the backward classes,. hence the. primary. task | -was to take constructive steps in order to beost up these classes by giving them adequate concessions, opportunities, facilities ard = + oo representation in the services and, last but nct the least,.in the électo- tate so’ that théir voices and views, grievances'and needs in the Parlia- = -—~~ - ment and State legislatures in the country may be ‘heard, felt ande gm fulfilled.
‘In this election appeal which has been filed against the Judgment’. ‘dated October 25, 1981 of the High Court of Madhya. Pradesh, we - ¥ are really concerned with the last aspect mentioned above. Despite : odds and ends our Constiution has made exhaustive provisions for achieving these ends-and how far, they have been implemerited _ ds difficult to say, for this is really a herculean task and one cannot + _ expect miracles to be performed within a span of three decades which in the history: of nations, is not a very long pericd. The knotty and’ difficult, puzzling and intricate issue with which we are faced is, to 2% put it shortly, ‘what happens if a member of.a scheduled caste or tribe leaves his ‘persent fold (Hinduism) and embraces Christianity or Islam | or any other religion’ —does this amount to a complete Joss of the _. original caste to. which he belonged for ever and, if so, if he or his «° - children choose td abjure the new religion and get reconverted to the old religion after performing the necessary rites: and ceremonies, could the original caste revive ? The serious. question posed here 7 arose arid has formed the subject-matter of a large catena of decisions = + starting from the year 1861, traversing a period of about a-century |
_ anda half, and: culminating in a decision of this Court in the casé of G.M. Arumugam v. S. Rajagopal -& Ors. (1)
- The’ Constitution has tried to solve the problem toa great extent by the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘1950 Order’) issued under Art. 343, which Jays +
-down a list of various castes prevailing in the country and the norms
~ to determine the same. This Order has been amended. from time to
“ . * ai 3 SCR 82. _
| _RAILASH SONKAR ¥. MAYA DEVI (Fazal Ali, J.) 181 time.. . ‘In our opinion, despite a genuine attempt to solve the problem the provisions do not provide a complete answer to the judicial interpretation by this Court which lays down. the law of the land. It is true that the controversy has been narrowed down to the minimum.
by the decision in Arumugan’s case (supra) still there are- some vital questions which Temain unanswered,
Before dealing with the cases on the subject and starting ihe chapter of the issues involved in this case, it may be germane to give’
a short history of the nature, character, origin and‘ background of the controversy. -To begin with, the caste system actually came into existence since the dawn. of the civilized races in this country, viz., Dravidian followed by Aryan civilization which through Hindu- ism divided by castes-into three clearcut sub-divisions which started _ by virtue of the occupational pursuits followed. by the various classes.
The priests. and the. scholars were known as the Bhrahmanas and:
looked after religious | ceremonies, education, etc. ‘This Class was supposed to be the highest Class or atleast ‘respected and regarded.
as such, Then came the Kshatriyas who were the people engaged in fighting wars and ruling and administering the States. ‘Thirdy, — _there were the Vaisayas who carried on the occupation of trade and ‘ commerce. The Sudras were addedas the fourth Class after ‘fusion of the pre-Dravidian with. the Dravidian and Aryan. civilizations which-formed the basic fabric of Hinduism and the Hindu society.
This Class was treated as a little inferior and suffered from certain disabilities. ;
>
In fact, it seems to us that our large sub-continent was inhabited by a very large variety of peoples and races-indigenous and ottsidersconsisting of Scythians, Yavanas, Kirathas, Kambhojas and’ Persians
- and others who’ came to India in ancient times and got mixcd.i up with ‘the old inhabitants of the country and thus completely jost their identity.. It appears to us that all these races entered the wide and broad fold of Hindusim, which is not only a religion but also a way or poetry of life, a philosophy, an. exhaustive and ethical code of living which adapts itself to all forms and cultures. In view of this complex intermingling of various _ kinds of ‘people, as time went by, castes started multiplying, and in this’ process ihe ayocations and occupations followed by members of such -castes from ‘generation. to generation were-labelled as a separate class to which the people practising various professions belonged and this institution had come to stay. The origin, therefore of the fundamental basis of the castes
_has now disappeared and given tise 40° individualism and .separa-
’
°
182 ae "SUPREME ‘COURT REPORTS . “1984 258. c. R.
ere tism as a result of which it \ was dilly recognised | by all schools of Hindu’ thought. that birth alone would determine the caste and this . principle would have to continue unless the concept of caste is banished - for ever. - In other words, it is now well setiled—whether ¢ one accepts ~
_ it or not—that caste is the result of birth and not of choice or volition, - Without traversing, on any controversial issue and: coming back: to”
' the origin of the caste system, we would - like to ‘refer to the. most ~* authoritative | pronotincements ordained -by Lord: Krishna in Shree « Bhagvadgita which would. demonstrate that’ the division of castes _- ". was" imade _purely on the basis of inherent qualities and avocations . - ” of a person and hence the: question of superiority. between one or .the other Jay not’on: ‘the nature of ‘the caste but on their actions and
» deeds. This would be illustrated by a ‘reference to the actual text of Shri Bhagvadgita as compiled . by F. Max Muller i in his book entitled ‘Sacred Books of the East (Volt VII)? and. we would like to extract - -some passages and. injunctions ‘of Lord Krishna illustrating the vices and virtues of men where castes also figure. | In Shloka 13, ‘Chapter
°. 4 of ‘Bhagvada Geeta, Lord Krishna clearly proclaimed that “Four Varnas, viz., Brahmanas, _ Kshtriyas, ‘Vaisyas and Sudras were created | by him on the basis of inherent qualities and avocations of a particular
-indiviqual”’., (Translated- into English from the original .text in |
Further said Lord Krishna to’ the son of Kunti thus~ -
“Whatever. ‘you do, O’Son’ of Kunti: “Whatever you cat, : whatever Sacrifies you: make, -whatever you give, whateverpenance you, do that. as offered to me,..1 am alike to all beings;. to ‘me.none is hateful, none’ dear, “But those who worship .me with “devotion (dwell) i in me, and J too in them... _ Even if a very ‘ill-conducted man worships me, not wor- . shipping any one else; he must’ certainly be deemed to be good, for he has well resolved. :.....(You' may) affirm, O son ‘of Kunti : that my devotee is never ruined.- For, O son of . “. Pritha .: "even those who are: of sinful birth, wonten, Vaisyas: and Sudrag likewise, resorting to me, attain the supreme goal. . What then’ (need be said of) holy Brahmanas and royal: saints who are (my) devolees ane en
These passages clearly. 30 to ‘confirm the true’ philosophy of Mahatma Gandhi that. the Sudras ‘or the. members of the scheduled * -. castes are Harijans and ‘he condemited untouchability and the habit) - of looking down, upon: the Seagduled caste people merely because
AS
»
“KATLASH SONKAR Y. "MAYA, DEVI (Fazal Ali, J. 7 183 they belonged to the © Sudra caste, Further, Lord Krishna goes én to * ; ordain as fol lows : ae Fo,
“The duties of Brahmanas, Kshatriyas and Vaisyas, and of, Sudras, too, O terror of your foes ! aredistinguished according to the qualities born of nature. Tranquility, restraint” "of the senses, penance, purity, forgivenéss, straight forward- ' ness,...also knowledge, experience, and belief (in a future world), ‘this is the natural duty of .Brahmanas. Valour, glory, courage, dexterity, not a slinking away from battle gifts, exercise of lordly power, this is the natural duty of Kshatriyas. Agriculture, tending cattle, trade, (this) is the natural. duty of -Vaisyas. And the natural duty of | «
Sudras, - too, consists in service. . (Every) man intent on his own respective duties obtains perfection .... Worshipping, ~ by (the performance of) his own duty, him from whom all ~. things proceed, and: by whom all this is permeated, a-man im obtains perfection.” ‘
In another chapter, Vidura is quoted as saying ‘thus’:
“fam born of a Sudra womb, and do not like to say-moreé :
than what ({ -have said’).. But the intelligence of that youth, -
I believe to be eternal. He who has come of a Brahmana womb, even though he may proclaim a great mystery, does not thereby become liable to the, censure of the gods: There- - ‘fore do I say this to you.”
In view of the revealed injunctions: in 1 the Shree Bhagavadgita Mahatma -Gandhi’s dream that all distinctions of castes and creed
. must disappear and man must be known- by his action, to whatever _caste he may belong, has been realised to some extent and necessary provisions to this effect have been made in the Constitution in order to
. safeguard the interests of the backward classes and members of the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes and perhaps, let us hops, a day comes: when the distinction between caste and creed disappears completely
One of the most puzaling question that arises in this case is:
‘Ts membership i in a caste or tribe to be “determined solely: by birth or by allegience or by the: opinion of its members or of the neighbourhood? Does one lose his caste on conversion ‘or by ex- -communication ?
SUPREME. COURT REPORTS a [1984] 2s.c.r.
The decisions to which we ‘would. refer hereafter have thrown . flood of Jight on these questions and the. generally accepted view seems to be the one which has been laid down in Charlotte’Abraham . ‘ and Daniel Vincent Abraham v. Francis Abraham where the e Privy
Council observed thus:
+
“tt is plain that 1 no role as to. such use and erjjoyment, which the ancestors may voluntarily have imposed | on themselves, could be of compulsory obligation on a descendant of theirs, acquiring his own wealth. If a Hindoo in an undivided
‘family may keep his own sole acquisitions separate, as he undoubtedly may, @ fortioria Christian may do the same...
If the spirit of an adopted religion improves those who become converts. to it, and they reject, from-conscience, customs to which their first converted ancestors .adhered, must the abandoned usages be’ treated by asort of fictio juris as still the enduring customs of the family.”’
So far as this. Court is concerned, these. questions were clearlyansweréd in Chaturbhuj Vithakdas Jasani v. Moreshwar Parashram & . Ors. 32 (hereinafter referred to as “Jasani’: s, case’avhere a triple test was laid down thus :
r ()9 ME A. wy -
“Looked at from the secular point of view, “there ; are three factors which have to be ‘considerd :
(q) the reactions of the “old body, (2) the intentions of the individual himself aod. (3) the rules of the new order, If the old. order is tolerant of the new faith and sees: no ‘reason to. outcaste or ex-communicate the convert and the individual’ himself desires and’ ‘intends to retain his old.social and political ties, the con- ~ version is only nominal for all practical purposes and when — ‘we have to considet the legal and political rights of the old:
body the- views of the new faith hardly’ matter....On ‘the other hand, if the convert has shown by his conduct.and ° _ dealings that his break from the old order is so complete:
and final that he no longer regards himself as a member
“of thé old body and ikere is reconversion and readmittance to the old fold, it would be ‘wrong to -hold that he can- nevertheless claim temporal privileges and political advanta-
(211954) SCR. 817 oo ot
(1) [1969} 1 S.C.R. 254.
¢ +
, , ean SONKAR V. MAYA DEVI (Fazal Ali, Jy. 185 | e “ * ges which aré special to the old order..:...The only modi- -
*. fication here is that it-is not only his choice which must be taken into account, but also the views of the body whose religious tenets he lids renounced, because here the right we are considering is the right of the old body, the right conferred on it as a special privilege to ‘send a member of its:
- own fold to Parliament.” .
The observations cited above give the general test that ‘can be applied in judging the question as to when a Hindu on conversion loses his caste. Although the test laid down by this, case is ~ fully supported by the original text of Hindu Law, it does not in so many - : words answer the other side of the picture, viz., if a Hindu after ° conversion to another religion is reconverted to. his original ' fold, could his caste revive ? In fact, the case cited above was not a case’ of conversion from one religion to another religion ar from one sect to another sect. By and large, the test laid down in that case can be usefully’ applied with alterations and modifications to suit the facts of a particular case in judging the question whether on cOn-¢ version the caste is completely lost. .
‘The next case which throws.some tight’ on the question is S.
Rajagopal v. C.M. Armugam Ors. In this case what had happened | was that the appellant (before ethe Supreme Court) had filed his nomination papers for a constituency reserved for members of the scheduled caste, mentioned under the 1950 Order but he was defeated — by respondent No. | of that case, whose petition. succeeded. The contention in the petition was that the appellant was not:a Hindu but a Christian and therefore not qualified to be a candidate for a _ ‘constituency reserved for scheduled caste. The High ‘Court found as a fact thatthe appellant had become a Christian in 1949 and his later, reconversion to Hinduism remained. unproved. This Courts agreeing with the High Court dismissed the appeal. One important feature of this case may. be noted which would at once distinguish this case from the facts of the present case. The question as to - whether a Christian on being reconverted to Hinduism’ would get back his caste did not arise at'all in that case because on the facts found, reconversion was not .proved. Therefore, the question of caste being acquired or being revived on recofiversion to Hindusim
. did not fall for determination and was left open. Even so, consi- © dering Jasani’s case and a number of other texts, Bhargava, J. made c
‘H
8 — a SUPREME couRT REPORTS _ [1984] 2 s:cr.
‘the following observations :
“Considering the question “of entry ‘into the caste, ’. Krishnaswami ‘Ayyangar, J., held that, in matters affecting ~ the weil-being or composition of a caste, the caste itself is the supreme judge: It was on this principle that a. recorivert to Hindusim could become a member of the caste, if the -
' caste itself as the supreme judge accepted him as a full mem- . ber of it.’
. While holding that if a person is reconverted to Hinduism and - the community of the caste to which’ he originally, belonged accepts - him, his caste would revive; nevertheless the guestion was left open. .-Rajagopal’s case (supra) merely. reiterates what was held in. Jasani’s case and does ‘not go any further. :
“In our opinion, “there -is one ‘aspect. which does not. appear to, have been dealt with ‘by any of the cases discussed. by us. Suppose,
Aa member of the scheduled caste, is converted to Christianity ‘and marries a Christian girl and-a daughter is born to him who, according to the. tenets of Christian religion, is baptised - and - educated. After she has attained the age of discretion -she: decides of her own volition to re-embrace. indusim, should in such ‘a case révival of the caste depend on the views of the members of the. com-: “munity of the caste concerned or would it ‘automatically revive on’ her reconversion if the- same is genuine and followed by the necessary rites and ceremonies ? In other words, is- it not. open for B (the daughter) to. say. that-because she’ was born of Christian parents their religion cannot be thrust on her when after attaining the. age of discretion and gaining some knowledge of the world affairs, she decides to revert to ‘her old feligion. It was not her fault that she was bora of Christian parents and baptised-at a time when she was still _ a minos and knéw ‘nothing about the religion. . Therefore, should | .
the revival of the caste depend on the whim-or will of the membeis
‘of the community of her ‘original caste or.shé would lose her caste for ever merely because fortunately or unfortunately she ‘was’: born in a Christian family ? With due respect, our confirmed opinion | is that although the-views of the members of the community would. - be an important factor, - their views should not be allowed to a com-’
"plete loss of the caste to whicli B belonged. Indeed, if too much stress is laid on the views of the’ members ‘of the community the same’ may - .
lead to: dangerous exploitation. Perhaps,.this factor was present
' jn. the mind of Bhagwati, J., who delivered the leading judgment e
KAILASH SONKAR vy. “MAYA DEVI (Fazal Alt 1) 487
; in a. a later decision of this Cott i im GM. Arumugam v. S. Rijagopal & A ~ Ors.9) where, ‘speaking for the Court, he made the following observations: © FB
“Jt is sufficient to’state. that originally there were only - ~ four iain castes; but gradually castes and sub-castes miltiplied as the social fabric expanded with the absorption. of © Be different. groups of. people belonging’ to various cults. and °° professing different religious’ faiths. The ‘caste system in its early. stages was quite elastic but in course of time it.gradually hardened into a. rigid. framework based upon heredity Lecaee But that immediately raises the question; | what is ,a caste. When we speak of a caste, we do not niean to refer CC in this context, tothe four primary castes, but tothe multi- 7 “plicity of castes and sub-castes which disfigure_ the Indian . social scene......A caste is mote a social. combination than / a religious group. 2 6 0 7 . ‘
But from that it does not necessarily follow as-an inva- | dD. . riable rule that whenever a person renounces: Hindusim and embraces another religious faith, he automatically* ceases to bea member of the caste in which he was born and to... which he belonged prior to his.conversion...... If thé struc oe _ ture of the caste is such that its membér must necessarily - —_ belong to Hindu religion, out of the caste, because no non- . . E _- .Windu.can be in the caste according to its rules and: regula- * tions.- Where, on the other hand, having regard to its .. ~ structure, as it has evolved ‘over the years, a cast@.. may consist not-only of persons. professing Hindu religion ‘but :| . also persons professing some other religion: as well, conver. “. sion from Hinduism to’that other teligion: may not involve F loss of caste, because even persons, professing such other: . religion can be siiembers of the caste......This is indeed- - “not an infrequent phenomenon in“South India where, <in- ’ some of the castes, even after conversion to. Christianity, a “person is regarded as ‘continuing. to belong ‘to -the | ‘caste, . oo . a G : There are castes, particularly i in ‘South india, where this consequence . does not follow on. conversion, since stich ~ castes.comprise both Hindus and Christians, ,
“(1) [1976] 3 SCR. 82. os yg
8 SUPREME COURT REPORTS {1984} 2'S.C.R.
These’. weighty observations , support . the view -that after reconversion the caste will normally, revive. On the question whether - “the caste. will revive if the members- of the community accépts the - reconvert, the. Judges are silent. Although Bhagwati, J. held that prima facie on {conversion to Christianity the respondent would not’ cease to belong to the Adi Dravida caste, yet he refrained from ex- — . pressing: any final opinion on the point.
Ina recent decisidn of this Court S. Ambalagan v. B. Devarajan &
Ors.™ (which was also an election case), a three-Judge Bench reitera- ~ ted the principles. enunciated d by Arumugan’ S case (supra) and observed thus :
: “Unless the practice of the caste “makes it necessary: | no expiatory rites need be performed and, ordinarily,. he regains his caste unless the community does not accept hini....
... The practice of caste however irrational it may appear to our reason and however. repugnant it may appear to our: moral and social sense, is so deep-rooted in the Indian people that it8 mark does not seem to disapper on conversion to a ~
- different religion. If it disappears, it disappears only to reappear on reconversion........ ;
In fact, this process goes on continuously in India and generation by generation lost sheep appear to return to the castefold and are once again ‘assimilated in that fold. This appears to be particularly so in the case of members of,
’ the Scheduldéd Castes; who embrace other religions in their » quest for liberation, but: return to their old religion on find- _
7 ding that their disabilities have: clung to them. with great tenacity.
_ (Emphasis ours)
The facts of this case appears to be on all fours with the facts of the present case. ; .
-’ A number of Hight Courts’ have also taken a view similar to the one taken. in Arumugam’s case ‘of 1976 (supra) basing mainly their. decisions on the leading case of Jasani. In the case of Goona " Durgaprasada Rao & Anr.v. Goona Sudarsanaswami & Ors. a
Division Bench of the Madras High Court observed thus :.
aye TEER.
(2). ILK 1940 Madras 653.
a*
KAILASH SONKAR ¥. MAYA DEVI (Fazal Ali, J.) 189 ,
“Tt is hardly right for the.Court to erect a barrier which the autonomy of the caste does not see fit to do,’ simply because in some other caste or some other community it might be considered proper that an expiatory ceremony ~ should be performed. That-a Hindu having renounced Hinduism once can revert to it scarecely.admits of doubt.
A Sinfilar view was expressed in G. Michael. v. Ss. Venkate- ‘swaran™) which may be extracted thus : . oN member of one of the castes or sub-castes when he is converted to Islam ceases:to be a member ‘of any caste: He becomes just a Mussalman find his place. in Muslim society is not determined by.the caste to which he belonged before his’ conversion. Learned counsel also conceded
’ that generally this is so even-when there has been a conversion * to Christianity. But he said that there were several cases in- which a member of one of the Jower castes who has been converted to Christianity bias continued’ not only to consider himself as still being a member of the caste, but. has also been considered so by other members of the caste who had: not been converted...... But these are all cases =: of exception arti the general tule is conversion operates as an expulsion from the caste; in a other words, a convert ceases to have any caste:
“Thus, ‘it- -was clearly hinted that in some cases even converts to Christianity could retain their original caste. In the case. of Dippala Suri Dora v. V.V. Giri? a Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court made the following observations : :
“Even if they’ come within the fold of Hiaduism, question would arise whether they have formed separate’ sect among themselves, or they would belong to the 4th _ ‘class, or to ‘the twice-born class..,...Jn order to prove that he ceased to be a member of that tribe, there should be first of all, evidence of intention, the reactions of the’ old body and that of the new body. Viewed in the light of these observatioris, the evidence discussed above, in our opinion, falls short of the test.
_ (i) AIR 1952 Madras 474.
(2) AIR 1958 A.P. 724. :
190. os a "SUPREME COURT REPORTS ~ U984}280R,,
This casc' + merely lays down the triple test enunciated in: Jasani’s case.” To the same effect are the decisions ‘in the cases’ of Wilson Reade v: C.S. Booth & Ors., a) and B. Shyainsunder v. Shankar ‘Deo . ; Vedalankar. & Ors: a) ,
On: a careful consideration, of the. authorities ‘referred to above 7 and the principles | enunciated by them, the © position | that emerges . May be stated thus:
‘It is. true that a caste to which a, Hindu belongs: is éssentially
; determined | by birth and if a Hindu is coverted to Christianity or.any, other religion which dots not recognise castes, the conversion amounts to a loss of the said caste,
_The question that arises for consideration is whether. the loss of the-caste is absolute; irrevocable so as not to revive under any
_ circumstances ? ? In considering this question the courts have gene into the history of the.caste system and: have-formulated - the following — ; guidirig principles to determine: this question-: eal
(a). Where’ a per son. belonging to a scheduled caste is con- the-convertee to“retain his caste or the family laws by which he was originally governed, There’ are, a number-of cascs where members belonging toa paftiuclar caste having been converted to Christianity — ~~ or-evén to Islam retain their’ caste or family laws and déspite the. -néw Order they” were: permitted’ to be governed by their ‘old Jaws.
- But this can happen only if the new religion is liberal and tolerant .. enough to pérmit such a coursé of action. Where the new religion, however does riot’at all.accept or believe in the caste: system, ‘the loss | of the caste: would bé final and complete. In a large arca of South, «and some of the. North- Eastern States it is not unusual to find persons . converted’ to Christianity retaining their’ ‘original caste without violaling the tenets of the new, Order which is done. asa “matter ofcommon -- practice existing . from times immemorial. In. such. a category of cases; it is obvious that even if a person abjures his old religion an@ - 18. converted to a’ new one, there is no loss of caste. Moreover, it is‘a common feature of maiy: converts to a new religion to believe or have faith in the Saints bélonging to other religions, For instance, a number of Hindus have faith in the Muslim Saints, Dargahs, #mam-
(i) AIR 1958 Assam 128 ° (2).AIR.1960 Mysore 27 we
_verted to Christianity or Islam, the same involves Idss of the caste. © _ unless the religion to which he is‘converted is Ifperal enough to permit
KAILASH SONKAR v. MAYA DEVI (Fazal Ali,.J.) > 191.
badas which becomes ‘a part of. their. lives and some Hindus even ‘adopt mustini names after the Saints but this does not meat that thay have discarded the old Order and got. themselves converted to
7: Islam.
(b) In all other cases, conversion to Christianity ‘or Islam : or any other religion which does not accept the caste system and insists on relinquishing the caste, ‘there, is a‘loss of caste. on conver: sion.
The other important’ question which is to be answered and which is really the controversy in the present case is :if after a person . 2 is converted to a new religion - -in the iristant case, Christianity - does his caste revive if he j is reconverted to his old religion and, if so, ° ‘under what circumstances 2 . AS indicated above, starting from the © Privy: Council to- the present-day, authorities of the High Courts. ~
‘and this Court have laid down certain norms and conditions under which a. caste could revive. _ These conditions are as follows — (1) ‘where the convertee exhibits by his actions and behaviour ' his’ clear intention of abjuring the new- religion on his ~ own volition without any’ persuasion and is’ not motivated OY any benefit or r gain,
‘ey’ where. the community of the old order to which the con- _ vertee originally belonged is. gracious enough, to admit. . “him to the original caste. either expressly or by necessary intendment, and 7 oO
° N
G3) Rules. of the new. Order in permitting the converite to join the new caste. Co _
’ Unless. the aforesaid conditions are fulfilled to the loss of caste.
"on conversion is, complete and cannot be revived. In our opinion, - having regard to the present set-up and. the circumstances prevailing in our modern society; it will be difficult to insist’on the second condition, viz.; the insistence on ‘the members of the. community of. the caste to admit the convertge on reconversion to the original faith
‘because such a course of action may lead to dangerous consequences and ill-conceived exploitation.. The curse and cancer’ of. untoucha-
' bility despite thirty years of social ‘reforms still persist and no quarter .
should be given to further persecutidn ofthe members of the scheduled’:
“castes who, as. we often find, are subjected ‘to all kinds of indignities, -
~ 492: oe SUPREME COURT REPORTS a 988) 2S.cR.
insults and : are looked down upon as slaves or vassals, meant mergly to serve the members-of the higher caste. In’ the case of Ganpg fv. Returning. Officer & Ors. this Court, speaking through Alagiriswami, J. highlighted this particular aspect in the following words-: “The. monstrous curse of untouchability has, got’ to “be eradicated. It has got to. be eradicated not merely by _. making constitutional. provisions.or laws but also by eradicating it from the minds and hearts of men. For that it is even more important that members ‘of communities who © are ‘untouchables should assert their self-respect and fight for . their dignity than that. members of the other communities ~ should forget about it.
Yn our opinion, the main test should be a genuine intention of the reconvert to abjure his new Seligion and completely dissociate himself from it. We must hasten to add here that this does ‘not mean: that the reconversion should be only a suse or a pretext or a cover to’
gain mundane worldly benefits so that the reconversion - becomes merely a show for achieving a particular purpose whereas the real intention may: be shrouded in mystery. The reconvert must exhibit a clear and: genuine intention to go back to his old fold ard adopt the customs and’ practices of the. said fold without any protest. from - members of his erstwhile caste.. In order to judge this factor, it is not necessary that there should be a direct or conclusive proof of ‘the expression of the, views of the community’ -of the ’ erstwhile caste
_ and it would be sufficient compliance of this éondition if no exception — or protest is lodged by the community meinbers, in which case the caste would revive on the reconversion of the: person to his old’ religion. a . —_
Another aspect which one must not forget is that when a. child.
‘is born neither has he any religion nor is he capable of choosing one until he reaches the age of discretion and acquires proper under-.
standing of the situation, Hence, the mere fact that the parents of a child, who. were Christians, would in ordinary course get the usual baptism certificate and perform, other ceremonies without the child knowing that is being done but after the child has grown up and becomes fully mattire and able to decide his future, he ought ° ‘not to be bound by what his. parents may have done. Therefore, in such cases, .it ‘is the intention of the convertee which would détermine
“OBI ISER 93.0
KAILASH SONKAR V; MAYA pevi (Fazal Ali, J) 193
‘the revival of the. caste. - If by his clear and conclusive conduct the’
person reconyerts to his old faith and abjures the new religion in
* unequivocal terms, his ¢ caste automatically revives.
°
- Another’ dominant factor to determine the revival ‘of the caste of .a convert from Christianity to.his old religion would: be that in.-— cases of election to the State Assemblies or the Parliament, where’ - ‘under the, Presidential Order a, particular constituency is réserved. for a niember of the scheduled caste or tribe and the electorate gives -
‘a majority verdict in his favour, then-this would be doubtless proof
” positive of the fact that his community has accepted him back
‘to his old foid and-this would result in a revival of the original caste to which. the said candidate belonged.
In our opinion, when a person is converted to Chiistianity or some other feligion-the original caste’ remains under eclipse and as
" soon as during his/her life-time the person is reconverted to the original réligion the eclipse disappears and the caste automatically revives. . Whether or not the. revial of the caste depends on the will and discre~ tion of the ‘members of the community of the-caste is a-question on waichr we réfrain from giving any opinion because in the instant case there is overwhelming evidence to show that the respondent: was accepted by the ‘community of her original katia caste. Even so, if the fact of the acceptance by the members of the community is
’ made a condition precedent to the revival of the caste, it- would lead” _ . to, grave consequences; and unnecessary . exploitation, sometimes “motivated by political’ considerations. Of course, if apart from the oral views of the community there is any recognised documentary proof of a custom or code of conduct or tule of law binding on. : a particular caste, it may be necessary to insist on.the consent of the .
members of the community, otherwise in normal eircumstances the caste would fovive by applying the principles of dectrine of éclipse,
' We might pause here to add a rider to what we have said, i.c., where it appears that the person reconverted. to the old religion had been converted to Christianity since several generations, it may be difficult .
to apply the doctrine of eclipse to the revival. of caste. However,
: that question dogs not arise here.
Comi ng now to thé facts and evidence ‘of the pitsent c case the position. may be briefly stated-as follows :
The appellant, ‘an MA. LL.B: from Jabalpur University. -had . -coates ted election. from the | Madhya Pradesh Vidhan Sabha (here- .
194 _ SUPREME COURT REPORTS - fi $84] 25.0.R.
inafter referred to as. ‘Vidhan’ ‘Sabha ) from Legislative - Assembly. ‘constituency No. 195'in the general eléection of 1977 as a Janata Party ‘Candidate which was reserved for Scheduled Caste under Art. 332 ‘of the Constitution being item No..30 of. Part TX-Madhya’ Pradesh of the 1950 Order. He was declared elected defcating his nearest rival candidate, one Ramprasad Choudhary, a Congress candidate. The Vidhan Sabha was, however, dissolved in February 1980 after which general elections for all the constituencies were to be held afresh, as notified in the Gazette, in the month of May 1980. The last date.
for filing nomination papers was.2.5.1980, the date of scrutiny was . -
3.5.80 and the polling took place on 31.5.80. The results were declared. on. 2.6.80. In this: election, ‘the appellant submitted his nomination papers as.an Independent candidate from constituency - No. 195 Gabalpur East) and was opposed by Smt. Maya Devi Shalwar — (hereinafter referred to as ‘Maya Devi’). who filed her nomination papers as a Congress (1) cadnidate. She described herself as belong- - ing to the scheduled caste ‘Katia’ which is mentioned at serial No. 29 of Part IX—Madhya Pradesh of the 1950: Order. In view of the short and narrow compass of this appeal we are not concerned with other candidates.
Tt may ‘be ‘mentioned that. originally. the caste ‘Katia’ was not " included in the list ef scheduled castes till the year 1977 but by the — Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Order (Amendment) Act, 1976 (Act No. 108 of 1976) the schedule was amended and: replaced bya new Schedule in which Katia caste was includded as_a, scheduled caste and shown at serial No, 29. ° mo
It appears that at the time of the scrutiny of the nomination papers of Maya Devi, several persons raised objection: that she, being a Christian by birth, could not be treated as’a member of the scheduled ~ caste and thercforé her declaration as’ a .scheduled caste candidate ~was.false ‘which merited dismissal of her nomination papers, The: case of Maya Devi was that she was a ‘member of the scheduled caste “by birth and her husband, Jai Prakash Shalwar, also belonged to the Katia caste. She denied that she was a Christian by birth and averred that her father’s name was not John Wesley as alleged by ,the appellant. Her plea found favour with the Returning Officer who accepted her nomination papers. After the poll, Maya Devi received ‘majority of votes, having. Secured 16,770 votes,-and was declared” elected, and the” appellant. lost the. election..
ty
It-was further alleged by the appellant that Maya Devi-after v , .. KAILASH -SONKAR P, MAYA DEVI (Fazal Ali, J.) ” 195.
being: born a Christian. was baptised’ according to Christian rites”
and her mother’s name was Elizabeth. The appellant also averred - A that Maya Devi’s marriage with Jai Prakash Shalwar was nota recognised form gf marriage and, therefore, not valid. A number of other pleas were also taken by the appellant in his petition but | Mr. ULR. Lalit, appearing: on his behalf, confined ‘his arguments to two important, questions. . . .
(1), whether Maya Devi having. been born of. Christian parents lost the. katia caste to which she or her ancestors originally belonged ? and _
“+ « : (Q) that after being baptised «she. continued to be.a Christian . and was shown as.such.in various documents.
. ‘In this view of the matter it. was contended that even if. she . ‘y married Jai, Prakash Shalwar-who belonged to Katia caste, her caste “could not revive because caste is determined not by marriage but by! birth. a
In proof of his seas, the appellant adduced both oral and ‘documentary evidence. The allegations made by him were denied by the respondent who categorically. stated that she was never a ..
"A Christian nor was she“ born-a Christian. She ‘also averred that even her father or mother were not Christians. On the other hand; she « always remained a member of the Katia caste and was accepted as such by the meinbers of that community because her marriage with ui Prakash Shalwar was performed according to Hindu rites of | Aryasamaj sect and was attended by a number of members of het casle and due publicity was given | to the marriage. , 7 Both the parties have adduced evidence’ in support of their cases. One important fact which may be noted here ts that.the father "of the respondent- John Westey - who according ‘to Maya Dev: was John Wesley Singh, in spite of being. cited as a witness did not enter “ the witness'box to throw light on the origin of the religion of the '. respondent and a. huge capital has been made of the non- -appearance of the said witness, “which according’ to the appellant is the strongest
A possible circumstance to- discredit the case of the respondent.
It is true that 1 the father of: ‘the respondent was not examined as a witness but having regard to the’ nature of the documents produced ,
196 0 SUPREME couRT REPORTS 1984)2 sen.
. by the parties the 1 mere fact that John Wesley was not examined : as ’ a witness is not sufficient to thtow the case of ‘the respondent abeard,
It is also true that the respondent was ill-advised to’ deny the ‘entire case of the appellant by making an averment that she was not born
. of Christian parents at all. We would; therefore, take it as established:
that thé respondent was ‘undoubtedly born of Christian parents, That by itself does not advance the case of the appellant any further because .
_ if it is proved that she’ was voluntarily: reconverted to Hinduism then ; according to the law referred to us and applied to the facts of the. . _ present’ case on reconversion her original caste would automatically. revive. “We would give a brief summary of the nature of the evidence | o produced by the parties én this limited question.
‘To begin with the appellant has relied’ on the birth certificate (Ex, P- 21) which.shows that a female child was born to John Wesley’ S wife on’ 46.1947. It is*also clearly mentioned ,therein that John Wesley. was a Christian. This was followed by a baptism certificate which shows that shé was baptised according to the religious ceremonies of the Christians,’ The appellant ‘also produced a © Church
_ membership certificate to show that’ Maya Isabella John Wesley
(respondent) was’ baptised and admitted as a member of the City
M:thodist Church in Southern Asia at Jabalpur, Madhya ‘Pradesh. ° The school transfer certificate dated 6.6.1956 shows that Maya Isabella . Johny Wesley was a.Christian and. remained-a student of Peeli Kothi Giris, Primary School, Jabalpur from 1.7.1952 to 30.4.1956, and her date of birth in this certificate has been shown’ as 4.6.1947 which
.. fully. tallies with her birth certificate. In view of the overwhelming:
pare we : & : evidence: referred to above, it is not necessary for us to consider -the
_oral and docuinentary evidence which. conclusively proves —(1) that’ "+ the pareats of the respondent were Christians and (2) that after her - ~ birth’ she got ‘gaptised and temained a Chri ist! an, and therefore it - cannot be denied that the respondent: was born’ a Christian and jin this view of the matter the moment she entered the fold of Christianity,
“her ofiginal-caste was completely lost. The respondent i in her anxiety to succeed has overstated her case by wrongly alleging that she was never born of Christian parents or that her parents were net. Christians, a ‘fact which is completely falsified by the oral and. documentary.
evidence produced by the appellant.
- “Accepting, therefore, the evidence led by the appellant, the vital question for’ determination in this casé remains aS to whether
‘or not the respondent was voluntarily reconverted to Hinduism and - thereupon her caste revived. There is® clear and. unimpeachable .
' - * »,* . ”
t
- + ra
_KAILASH SONKAR Y. MAYA DEVI (Fazal Al, Jy) *. 197.
evidence ‘to show that the respondent chad reconverted herself to Hinduism voluntarily and with full publicity, making no secret of
~ this fact.” A letter appearing-at page 22. of the Paperbook shows that she accepted Hindu religion with all its customs and rites vohin- sarily. . The relevant part of f the letter reads thus :
“Tg am. prepared to own Hindu religion with all sincerity aud to follow all its customs and. rites.
Today, on 6.11 1.16 I am ‘fully major. - Hence the above decision i iS of my own wherein no ‘external, interference exists.”
“Immediately thereafter she was married to one Jai Prakash Shalwar and the marriage certificate dated 14.11.76 fully corrcbcrates. this fact (page 24 of the Paperbook): The Marriage cettificate states’ .
.that the marriage of Maya Devi with Jai-Prakash was‘ performed on 6.1 1.76 in Arya Samaj Gorakhpur according to vedic rites. Another — certificate issued by the. Secretary. of the Arya Samaj, Gorakhpur is also to the same effect. The aforesaid documents are amply corro-
‘borated by- the oral evidence led by the respondent.
The: evidence of Darshanlal Dharmak deserves special mention. because. this witness was a prominent member and President of the
- Katia community for. the last two-and-a half years. The witness goes on to state that the marriage was celebrated in the presence of
80 persons ‘of nis community, including elderly people and his pre-- : | sence atthe marriage clearly indicates that the community had fuliy
-accepted the respondent back to her caste. The marriage was followed by a reception 3-4 days later which was attended by. this witness also and at that time nobody raised any objection about Maya .as not belonging to the Katia community. The witness further states that he had gone to the house of the respondent and that members of the
. community had come fo celebrate the ‘birthday: of her child.
It would appear from the evidence of Bhaiyalal. Nag,’ another.
witness produced by the respondent, that there was a Katia Samaj
Sanstha in Madhya Pradesh which was registered under the Societies Registration Act and the witness was the Vice-President of this orga- nisation. . He states that Jai Prakash was known to him and belonged - to his caste and that he was married to Maya Devi, He further states...
‘that no objection was raised i in the Organisation about this marriage.
Hé further stated that. Maya Devi had been .attending number of marriages in his caste. He makes a very stark statement: -which is’
\ .
"extracted thus :
198 . “+ SUPREME C@URT REPORTS = [1984] 2 SCR.
a fully. supported by the Abhinandain Patia and his. statement may ‘be .
“We mentioned her in this Abhinandan: Patra as belonging to Katia caste as we were proud as she was the . first: M.L.-A. in our, caste.
. Ex. D-1A is the ‘Abhinandan Patra given to Maya Dévi some’
_ time in the year 1977-78; i.e. 3 years before the elections. Furthermore, there is the evidence of Keshav Prasad Pathak which is rather impor- , tant. “His evidence shows that a joint application was made by the
". respondent and her husband regarding their consent to the marriage. _ He further stated that before the parties are married, if either of them is not a Hindu then he is first converted to Hinduism (Shudhikaran) by religious rites. performed in accordance with the Aiya Samaj rites. He proves the applications. given by the respondent and her husband
(Ex. P-8 and 9). He has further stated that the marriage ceremony - is usualiy performed: before the members of the Executive Committee mean “Convert a non-Hindu to Hinduism . He goes on to say that the. marriage was celebrated -at the Arya Samaj according to vedic
‘ceremony which included Sapta “padi and Havan.
‘The appellacit himself in his statement-admitted that in Jabalpur
' there are five-six thousands people of katia caste. He further admitted that.he did not make any enquiries about the parents oy the place of residence of Elizabeth, mother of the respondent. ‘He further ¢
‘admits at page 87 of the Paperbook’ that in 1978 he. was taken by _ Shri Dharmak ag Chief: Guest in the Conference of Katia Samaj:
A. suggestion was made to him that he was’ present when the Katia community honoured the respondent on he: victory in the election. Reading in between’ the lines of his evidence it is clear that he was fully aware that the respondent had been reconverted’ to Hinduism and had been accepted by: the Katia community.
‘On a full and complete ‘appraisal of the oral and documentary |
. evidence, the following conclusions are inevitable :
1) ‘That the respondent was born of Christian parents and - was educated in various schools or institutions where. she was known.as a Christian, . *
2) that 3-4 years ‘before, the election, the respondent was
-of the Arya Samaj. He further défines the term ‘Shudhikaran lo
+
- a ; KAILASH SONKAR v. MAYA DEVI (Fazal Ali, J.) 199
4 reconverted to, Hinduism and married Jai Prakash Shalwar, . a member of the katia caste, and also performed the Shudhikaran ceremony, y 3) that she was-not only accepted but also welcomed by the "+" important members, including the President and Vice- President, of the community, 4) there is no evidence to show that there was any bar under , -’-.the Christian religion which could have prevented her. os - from reconverting herself.to Hinduism, - 5) that there was no evidence to’show that even her parents had been Christians from generation to generation. °. ~ In these circumstances, therefore, this case fulfils the conditions required. for being reconverted to Hinduism from Christianity In ‘order to revive the original casic, Under cl. (3) of the 1950 Order only two conditions are required _ ‘ for being eligible for election to a reserved constituency— ” A (a) that the candidate’ should not profess a religion different from the Hindu or the Sikh religion, and aa (b) that the candidate is a member of scheduled caste as shown . ae " * in the schedules:
In the instant case, it is not disputed that the Katia caste is (+ mentioned asa scheduled caste in part 1X of the. 1950 Order and ces, shown “at serial Number 29.
| Having. regard to the circumstances discussed above, it cannot , be said that at the time when the respondent filed her nomination papers; she was not a a member of the Katia caste. ,
For the reasons given’ above, the judgment of the High Court
~ _ is affirmed and the appeal is dismissed but in the circumstances with: out any order as to costs. : :
H.S.K. a a : . Appeal dismissed