SC status on Dalit Christians: Why Chinthada Anand verdict isn’t the final word despite recent outcry

In an interaction, Peter and Masih pointed out key aspects of the ruling and the ongoing legal battle:

Q: There is a lot of concern following the recent Supreme Court judgment. How do you see it?

Tarsem Peter: This judgment is being blown out of proportion. It is not something new. The legal position has been the same for decades. The court has only reiterated what already exists under the law. People should not panic or misunderstand its implications.

Q: What exactly was the case about?

Hamid Masih: The case involved a pastor from Andhra Pradesh who sought protection under the SC/ST Atrocities Act. The court ruled that since he is a Dalit Christian, the Act does not apply to him under the current legal framework. This is consistent with the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, which restricts SC status to certain religions.

Q: Does this mean Dalit Christians cannot get SC status?

Peter: This is where the confusion lies. The larger issue—whether Dalit Christians should be granted SC status—is still pending before the Supreme Court. Multiple petitions challenging the 1950 order are under hearing. No final judgment has been delivered on that matter.

The recent Supreme Court judgment on this issue is nothing new; it relates to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has referred to Paragraph 3 of the ‘Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950’, also known as the Presidential Order of 1950. In the present case, the court has merely interpreted the existing position under this order.

Masih: However, it must be noted that petitions filed by organisations such as the National Council of Dalit Christians (NCDC), Catholic Bishop’s Conference of Indian (CBCI) and the National Council of Churches in India (NCCI), and others— challenging the constitutional validity of Paragraph 3 of the 1950 Order — are still pending before the Supreme Court, and no judgment has yet been delivered on them.

This order itself is based on religion-specific provisions, which are argued to be ultra vires (contrary to) the Constitution. The Constitution treats all religions equally under various provisions, whereas the disputed order recognises only three religions —Hinduism, Sikhism, and Buddhism — while excluding others such as Christianity, Islam, Judaism, etc.”

There is a clear distinction between the ongoing writ petitions before the Supreme Court and the recent judgment in the Chinthada Anand case. The matters being pursued by NCDC, CBCI, and NCCI—seeking rights for Dalit Christians and Muslims—are entirely separate.

Q: So won’t this judgment impact those ongoing petitions?

Peter: This judgment is limited to a specific case. The constitutional challenge to the 1950 Order is a completely separate matter. The court has not yet decided whether SC status can be extended to Dalit Christians or Muslims.

Q: What about the argument that the law discriminates based on religion?

Masih: That is precisely what is being argued in the pending cases. The Constitution guarantees equality and freedom of religion. Many believe that restricting SC status to only certain religions goes against that spirit. But again, the court has not ruled on this yet.

Q: Is there any other process underway apart from the court cases?

Peter: Yes, the government has set up a commission, headed by former Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan. The commission studied whether SC status should be extended to Dalit converts. Its report is final, but this report has received objections from certain groups.

Q: What is your message to the community right now?

Masih: Our message is ‘Please don’t become victims of mass hysteria regarding this judgment’. The real issue is still being fought in the Supreme Court. This is a long legal and constitutional battle, and it is still ongoing.

Peter: The focus should remain on the larger constitutional question rather than isolated interpretations of individual judgments.