Supreme Court of India.Supreme Court has reiterated that once a person reconverts to his original faith, his caste will revive since caste has linkage to birth..A Bench of Justices Ranjan Gogoi and Prafulla C Pant allowed the appeal filed Mohammed Sadique and upheld his election as MLA from Bhadaur constituency – a constituency reserved for Scheduled castes..Senior Advocates Harin Raval and Atul Nanda appeared for Mohammed Sadique while Senior Advocate Yashank Adhyaru appeared for the Respondent, Darbara Singh Guru..Sadique, was born to Muslim parents. He had officially embraced Sikhism in 2006. He contested election in 2012 from the constituency which is reserved for Scheduled caste and emerged successful. Subsequently, his election was challenged by one Darbara Singh Guru (Respondent) who had contested election against Sadique. Guru contended that Sadique is a Muslim and does not belong to Scheduled caste. The Punjab & Haryana High Court allowed Guru’s petition and set aside Sadique’s election whereupon Sadique appealed to Supreme Court..Sadique’s contention was that though he was born to Muslim parents, he was “Doom” caste by birth and had lived as a Sikh right from childhood. He had never offered prayers in mosque or observed Rozas. He had further pleaded that from his childhood used to go to the Gurudwaras to pay obeisance and followed the rites, rituals and customs of Sikh religion. He also claimed that he performed ‘Sampath Path’ with Ragis at his residence for seven days in the year 2000, and his two daughters were married to Hindu boys. He also had a caste certificate issued to him in 2006 showing him as belonging to “Doom” caste..The Respondent’s contention was that though Sadique belonged to ‘Doom’ community and embraced Sikhism, he would not become a schedule caste as a person embracing any religion other than Hinduism and Sikhism would not carry his caste with him. So, a Muslim belonging to a Scheduled caste community cannot contest election as Scheduled caste..Relying on the cases of Kailash Sonkar v. Maya Devi, KP Manu v. Scrunity Committee for Verification of Community and Certificate, S Anbalagan v. B. Devarajan, the Court held that a person can change his religion and faith but not his caste and it revives when the person converts back to the original faith..“In the case at hand, admittedly the appellant was born to muslim parents. However, he has proved that his family members though followed Islam but they belonged to “Doom” community. It is settled law that a person can change his religion and faith but not the caste, to which he belongs, as caste has linkage to birth. It is proved on the record that the appellant was issued a caste certificate as he was found to be member of ‘Doom’ community by the competent authority, after he declared that he has embraced Sikhism, and he was accepted by the Sikh community.”.Guru had also pointed out that Sadique had not changed his name after conversion to Sikhism. Sadique had rebutted the submission stating that it was because he wanted to keep the name of a popular singer by the same name. The Court held that it is not essential to change one name after embracing a different faith and it is only a corroborating fact..The Court, therefore, allowed the appeal setting aside the judgment of the High Court.
Supreme Court of India.Supreme Court has reiterated that once a person reconverts to his original faith, his caste will revive since caste has linkage to birth..A Bench of Justices Ranjan Gogoi and Prafulla C Pant allowed the appeal filed Mohammed Sadique and upheld his election as MLA from Bhadaur constituency – a constituency reserved for Scheduled castes..Senior Advocates Harin Raval and Atul Nanda appeared for Mohammed Sadique while Senior Advocate Yashank Adhyaru appeared for the Respondent, Darbara Singh Guru..Sadique, was born to Muslim parents. He had officially embraced Sikhism in 2006. He contested election in 2012 from the constituency which is reserved for Scheduled caste and emerged successful. Subsequently, his election was challenged by one Darbara Singh Guru (Respondent) who had contested election against Sadique. Guru contended that Sadique is a Muslim and does not belong to Scheduled caste. The Punjab & Haryana High Court allowed Guru’s petition and set aside Sadique’s election whereupon Sadique appealed to Supreme Court..Sadique’s contention was that though he was born to Muslim parents, he was “Doom” caste by birth and had lived as a Sikh right from childhood. He had never offered prayers in mosque or observed Rozas. He had further pleaded that from his childhood used to go to the Gurudwaras to pay obeisance and followed the rites, rituals and customs of Sikh religion. He also claimed that he performed ‘Sampath Path’ with Ragis at his residence for seven days in the year 2000, and his two daughters were married to Hindu boys. He also had a caste certificate issued to him in 2006 showing him as belonging to “Doom” caste..The Respondent’s contention was that though Sadique belonged to ‘Doom’ community and embraced Sikhism, he would not become a schedule caste as a person embracing any religion other than Hinduism and Sikhism would not carry his caste with him. So, a Muslim belonging to a Scheduled caste community cannot contest election as Scheduled caste..Relying on the cases of Kailash Sonkar v. Maya Devi, KP Manu v. Scrunity Committee for Verification of Community and Certificate, S Anbalagan v. B. Devarajan, the Court held that a person can change his religion and faith but not his caste and it revives when the person converts back to the original faith..“In the case at hand, admittedly the appellant was born to muslim parents. However, he has proved that his family members though followed Islam but they belonged to “Doom” community. It is settled law that a person can change his religion and faith but not the caste, to which he belongs, as caste has linkage to birth. It is proved on the record that the appellant was issued a caste certificate as he was found to be member of ‘Doom’ community by the competent authority, after he declared that he has embraced Sikhism, and he was accepted by the Sikh community.”.Guru had also pointed out that Sadique had not changed his name after conversion to Sikhism. Sadique had rebutted the submission stating that it was because he wanted to keep the name of a popular singer by the same name. The Court held that it is not essential to change one name after embracing a different faith and it is only a corroborating fact..The Court, therefore, allowed the appeal setting aside the judgment of the High Court.
