Supreme Court’s SC Ruling Rekindles Debate On ST Delisting In Jharkhand

After the Supreme Court’s recent ruling on Scheduled Castes, the debate over delisting within Scheduled Tribes has once again gathered momentum in Jharkhand.

Aadivasi leader Nisha Bhagat, who often speaks against Christians and Muslims on the issue of religious conversion, described the Supreme Court’s decision on Dalit conversion as a victory . Posting a video on social media, she said, It is a victory for the Aadivasi community. She also claimed that the decision validated her earlier protest, during which she had shaved her head while demanding a halt to conversions of Adivasis to Christianity and other religions and calling for their delisting.

But does the Supreme Court’s judgment mention Adivasis at all?

In fact, on 24 March, while hearing the Chinthada Anand case from Andhra Pradesh, the Supreme Court said that if a person belonging to a Scheduled Caste adopts Christianity or Islam instead of Hinduism, Buddhism, or Sikhism, that person will lose SC status. The case concerned a Dalit man who had converted to Christianity long ago and had become a pastor. He filed a complaint under the SC/ST Act alleging assault and caste-based remarks. When the matter reached the Andhra Pradesh High Court, it was dismissed. He then challenged the decision in the Supreme Court. Upholding the High Court’s order, the Supreme Court stated that after converting to Christianity, he could not claim legal protections and benefits meant for the Scheduled Castes.

Referring to provisions in the Constitution, the Court said that a Dalit person who adopts another religion will not receive Scheduled Caste benefits, because these benefits are limited to Hindus, Sikhs, and Buddhists. This provision has existed since 1950. In other words, this is not something new. Also, the judgment nowhere mentions the Scheduled Tribes.

Then why is Bhagat linking the ruling to Adivasis and calling it their victory?

The RSS and the BJP have long demanded the delisting of those Adivasis who converted to Christianity or Islam. At the same time, those who adopted Hinduism are described as part of the Sarna–Sanatan fold and treated as belonging to the same cultural stream.

For nearly two decades, politics around conversion has shaped divisions among Adivasis themselves in Jharkhand. However, unlike in states such as Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh, and Odisha, where the BJP gained political advantage from such issues, similar efforts have not yielded the same results in Jharkhand.

Before the Jharkhand Assembly elections, the Janjati Suraksha Manch, an RSS-linked organisation working among Adivasis, held a big rally in Ranchi’s Morabadi Ground demanding delisting. The issue did gain attention afterward, but religious polarisation among Adivasis did not develop in the same way as it has elsewhere.

At that rally, Karia Munda, an eight-time BJP MP from Khunti, who was leading the Manch’s efforts in Jharkhand, demanded that Adivasis who had converted to Christianity or Islam should lose their Scheduled Tribe status.

Before the elections, the way the delisting issue was raised suggested it might influence Adivasi voters in the state. But the results showed otherwise. In fact, for the first time since Jharkhand was formed, the BJP’s hold among Adivasis appeared to weaken.

Even outside election cycles, however, the issue keeps resurfacing in Jharkhand from time to time. Once again, it has returned and this time in connection with the Supreme Court’s ruling on Dalit conversion.

Reacting to the judgment, Nisha Bhagat said that since both SCs and STs have special constitutional provisions, Adivasis who converted to Christianity or Islam should also lose their ST status, just as Dalits do. According to her, such people have weakened Adivasi and Indian culture while continuing to benefit from reservations meant for original Adivasis.

When asked why she does not demand delisting of Adivasi Hindus, she told Outlook, “Followers of Sanatan and Adivasis worship water, forests, and land. They treat them as mother. But Christians and Muslims do not consider the land as mother. They are very rigid about their own religion and culture and are strengthening foreign influences. Those who stand with us to protect our culture and India’s culture, why should I not stand with them? Sarna and Sanatan are fighting together to protect India’s traditions.”

Like the RSS and the BJP, Nisha Bhagat demands the delisting of those who converted to Christianity or Islam. She identifies herself as a follower of the Sarna faith and believes Sarna and Sanatan are the same. However, Adivasi organisations that have long demanded recognition of Sarna as a separate religion oppose this view and reject any comparison between Sarna and Sanatan.

Whenever Sarna and Sanatan have been described as identical, Adivasi organisations have strongly objected. Sarna religious leader Bandhan Tigga says that both the social system and customs of Adivasis are different from those of Hindus. Their way of life, culture, and language are distinct. He argues that Adivasis have never been part of Hindu society. Hindu society has a varna hierarchy, whereas Adivasi society is based on equality. Marriage, birth, and death rituals are also different. Therefore, the two cannot be treated as one.

For nearly four decades, Adivasi organisations have demanded recognition of a separate religious identity on this basis. The demand for a Sarna religion code has continued in the state for years. On 12 November 2020, the Hemant Soren-led government passed a resolution in the Assembly and sent it to the central government. Even after five years, no decision has been taken.

Ravi Tigga, associated with the Raji Pargana Sarna Prarthana Sabha, believes that linking the Supreme Court’s decision on Dalits with the demand for delisting is an attempt to divert attention from the demand for the Sarna religion code.

He told Outlook, “The Supreme Court’s decision concerns Dalits and is nothing new. The provision has existed for a long time. Connecting it with the delisting of Adivasis distracts from the real issue. RSS and BJP leaders talk about ‘ghar wapsi’ for Adivasis, but what they mean is that those who converted to Christianity or other religions should return and become followers of Sanatan. When someone is Christian–Sarna, they loudly emphasise Sarna identity; but when someone is Sarna–Sanatan, they say both are the same. In my view, if delisting happens, it should apply to Hindus as well, because many Adivasis have become Hindus too.”

He further said that if the Sarna religion code is granted, many Adivasis who moved to other religions may return under that identity.

According to the 2011 Census, Adivasis constitute 26.2 per cent of Jharkhand’s population of 3.29 crore, which is around 8.6 to 8.7 million people.

It cannot be denied that conversions have taken place among Adivasis. In some northeastern states, a large Adivasi population has adopted Christianity. In Jharkhand, however, more Adivasis follow Hinduism than Christianity. According to information obtained through an RTI application by advocate Dipti Horo in 2018, excluding Sarna followers, 32,45,856 Adivasis identified as Hindus, 13,38,175 as Christians, 18,107 as Muslims, 2,946 as Buddhists, 984 as Sikhs, 381 as Jains, and 25,971 reported following no religion.

These figures suggest that in Jharkhand, far more Adivasis follow Hinduism than Christianity. Based on these numbers, associated with RSS Hirendra Sinha argues that Sarna and Sanatan are essentially the same.

He said, “Hindus and Adivasis are one. Their forms of worship originated in this land. Those who adopted religions that came from outside should be delisted. Just as the Supreme Court ruled on Dalit conversion, the same rule should apply to Adivasis.”

He believes the judgment will strengthen the demand for delisting but says the issue can only be resolved through a constitutional amendment.

Adivasi writer and activist Gladson Dungdung describes the demand for delisting as propaganda promoted by the RSS and its affiliates. He says the issue has long been used to create divisions among Adivasis and has also served the BJP’s electoral interests.

Explaining the constitutional difference between Dalits and Adivasis on conversion, he said, “On 10 August 1950, the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order stated that if a person from an SC community adopts a religion other than Hinduism, Sikhism, or Buddhism, they will not remain in the SC category. This applies to Dalits because caste hierarchy exists among them. But in the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order issued on 6 September 1950, there is no such provision. Adivasis do not follow the caste system; they follow a clan-based structure. Therefore, changing religion does not erase their tradition, culture, or identity. Linking the Supreme Court’s observation on Dalits with Adivasis only spreads RSS propaganda.”

The Janjati Suraksha Manch, associated with the RSS and working among Adivasis, has raised the issue of delisting since its formation. The organisation was established in 2006 in Raipur, Chhattisgarh, and has been demanding delisting ever since. It claims that in 2009, around 2.8 million Adivasis sent postcards to the Government of India demanding a delisting bill.

Those who support delisting also argue that the demand is not new. They point out that senior Congress Adivasi leader Kartik Oraon raised the issue between 1967 and 1970 and even brought it up in Parliament.

According to experts, any change related to delisting or Adivasi rights would require an amendment to Article 342 of the Constitution, which governs provisions related to Scheduled Tribes and reservations.