This paper analyzes caste discrimination in India, focusing on legal perspectives, evolution of rights, protective measures, and challenges. It examines the Indian Constitution's role in protecting Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes' rights, including Article 15 prohibiting discrimination based on religion, race, caste, sex, or birth. The paper examines legislative measures to combat castebased discrimination, including the 1989 Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, and affirmative action policies like reservation in education and employment. It critically analyzes judicial interpretations and landmark judgments to assess the effectiveness of these measures.

The paper highlights challenges in implementing anticaste laws, including socioeconomic disparities, ineffective enforcement, and persistent social prejudices. It calls for a comprehensive approach to address caste discrimination, including robust legal reforms, improved implementation strategies, and societal commitment to eradicating inequalities, requiring collaboration between legal institutions, government agencies, and civil society.

Introduction
Law's competence, efficacy and difficulty to interact with society for ensuring and expanding freedom, welfare and justice to people can be properly understood by looking to t the social milieu and community's structure upon which it operates. The internal structure of a hierarchic society or operation of patriarchy can hardly be ignored when the social division is responsible for emergence and prevalence of special privileges and unusual disabilities of specific groups at the social plane.

One of the foremost social realities that shape intergroup and interpersonal social relations in India is caste system. The unequal opportunities and conditions of dignity offered by the social categorization through caste system in educational and economic fronts can not be silently tolerated by a welfare state.

Untouchability, which is the culmination of caste prejudice of pollution/purity, is one of the grossest violations of human rights to which legal system has been quite sensitive. While filling the values of cosmopolitan culture into a tradition bound hierarchic society faces all the challenges of modernization, levelling up the lowly and the weak by ameliorative policy attains abundant significance in the context of legal system adhering to social justice and social revolution.

The social responses to issues relating to composition, intergroup mobility and intergroup tension have resulted in conflicts, sensitive struggles and evolution of compro mise policies. Overall direction towards social integration of different communities and building up of harmonious society is visible in these policies. The present chapter focuses on law's policy and contribution towards social transformation in the matter of caste and community.[1]

Meaning and Definition:
The word caste was originally associated with India's traditional system of hereditary and rigidly stratified classes, but this noun can now be used to refer to any social group distinguished by shared characteristics, such as rank, economic wealth, or profession.

The root of caste is the Latin castus, which means "chaste" or "pure, separated." The word arrived in English through the Portuguese casta, which means "race" or "lineage," and was first used in the 1700s in reference to Hinduism's system of social stratification. By the nineteenth century, though, this noun was used metaphorically to describe any type of group that resembled this, as in the example, "Some sought to abolish the privileges enjoyed by an elite caste of business and financial leaders."

The term caste has been defined differently by different people:

• Cooley: "When a class is somewhat hereditary we call it caste."
   
• Risley: "A caste may be defined as a collection of families or groups of families bearing a common name which usually denotes or is associated with specific occupation claiming common descent from a mythical  ancestor, human or divine professing to follow the same professional calling and are regarded by those who are competent to give an opinion as forming single and homogenous community."
   
• Maciver: "When the status is wholly predetermined so that men are born to their lot without any hope of change in it, then the class takes the extreme form of caste."
   
• E.A.H. Blum: "A caste is an endogamous group, or collection of endogamous groups, bearing a common name, membership of which is hereditary imposing on its members certain restrictions in the matter of social intercourse, either following a common traditional occupation or claiming a common origin and generally regarded as forming a single homogenous community."

Historical Background
In the beginning of the 20th century some of the states like Mysore and Kolhapur initiated the policy of absorbing the depressed classes to administration by reservation. While in the Assembly one of the fourteen nominees was required to be the representative of the Depressed Classes, the Provincial legislatures were required to have fixed proportion of Depressed Class members. Census reports from 1871 to 1931 disclosed statistics about castes and subcastes: the size, the economic and social position and locality of concentration. In a sense, colonialism "consoli dated" the "traditional" caste society.

Gandhiji suggested, in 1920s, religious solutions to the evils of caste and untouchability Temple entry movement started in certain parts of Maharashtra and Kerala. Gandhiji had soft policy of weaning away the caste Hindus from the practice of untouchability and placating the depressed classes to adopt clean way of life with boldness as a measure of uplift In late 1920s, Dr. B.R. He stood for annihilation of caste and bitter denunciation of Shastrik prescriptions of caste discrimination.

The Poona Pact of 1932 resolved this conflict by providing for proportion of special seats in the provincial legislatures for the DCs but doing away with separate "untouchable" electorates Following the Poona Pact, the policy of ameliorating the DCs by scheduling their castes on the basis of Census data of 1931 began. But state action discriminating on the basis of caste only is prohibited.

The package of reforms included special provisions, reservation in public employment, allowing of temple entry reforms, support to educational and economic empowerment, political reservation for lim ited duration (which was extended from time to time through consti tutional amendments) and other supervisory and monitoring arrange ments for implementation. Thus, eradication of untouchability is a policy that has several dimensions and asks for holistic approach for planning and effective implementation.[1]

The Jurisprudential Aspect[1]
The Jurisprudential Aspect of Legal Perspectives On Caste involves examining how laws and judicial interpretations address casterelated issues, including rights, protections, and challenges. This analysis is crucial for understanding how legal systems address caste discrimination and inequality.

Here's a breakdown of key areas:

1. Historical Context: Caste discrimination has deep historical roots, with practices entrenched in social structures and religious doctrines. Historically, castebased discrimination was pervasive, affecting various aspects of life, including employment, education, and social status.
    
2. Legal Framework: The legal response to caste discrimination has evolved over time. In countries like India, which has a significant castebased social hierarchy, the Constitution and various statutes provide a framework for addressing caste discrimination.
    
3. Judicial Interpretation: Indian courts have played a crucial role in interpreting constitutional provisions and legislation related to caste. Landmark judgments have reinforced the principles of equality and nondiscrimination, while also expanding the scope of legal protections for marginalized groups.

The jurisprudential perspective on caste involves understanding how legal systems address the complex issues surrounding caste, including the rights and protections afforded to marginalized groups and the challenges in implementing these protections. It requires a comprehensive approach that integrates constitutional principles, legislative measures, judicial interpretations, and social change efforts to effectively combat caste discrimination and promote equality.

NonDiscrimination On the Ground of Caste As A Constitutional Policy
The elimination of untouchability, the prohibition of castebased discrimination among citizens, the implementation of protective measures such as reservations for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Socially and Educationally Backward Classes, and Other Backward Classes, as well as the facilitation of temple entry, represent significant public policies established by Indian society. These policies have been enshrined in the Constitution and have shaped numerous legislative and administrative actions.

Problems and perspective:

1. General: The elimination of untouchability, the prohibition of castebased discrimination among citizens, the implementation of protective measures such as reservations for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Socially and Educationally Backward Classes, and Other Backward Classes, as well as the facilitation of temple entry, represent significant public policies established by Indian society. These policies have been enshrined in the Constitution and have shaped numerous legislative and administrative actions.[1]
   
   Application of creamy layer test to SC/ST: The necessity for an objective assessment of individuals in genuine need was acknowledged in the Indra Sawhney case concerning Other Backward Classes. Justice B.P. Jeevan Reddy emphasized the importance of shared characteristics among members of the same class, stating that if certain individuals are significantly more advanced socially—implying economic and possibly educational advancement the connection among them and the rest of the class is severed. Such individuals would not fit within the class. The question then arises: after excluding these individuals, does the class still qualify as a competent group?
   
   The notion of group backwardness cannot be extended to encompass those who are notably advanced within the backward class. It was also noted, albeit in passing, that this 1. discussion pertains solely to Other Backward Classes and does not apply to Scheduled Tribes and Scheduled Castes. This observation indicates that the Court refrained from making determinations regarding the applicability of the test to SC/STs, as the case specifically addressed OBCs. This approach aligns with the Court's practice of limiting its decisions to what is necessary for resolving the case at hand. Crucially, the Court asserted that the framework of equality cannot endure without the implementation of the creamy layer test, which has significant implications for social justice.[1]
    
2. The problem of nonbirth entry into cast or reservation category: Birth serves as an unambiguous criterion for membership in a caste, as the social environment established by the caste and the upbringing of the child from an early age are likely to shape the child's development and abilities. Conversely, an outsider's integration into that social group later through marriage, conversion, or adoption may not necessarily entail the same disadvantages and could, in fact, be driven by a desire to obtain benefits associated with affirmative action.[2]
   
   Role of National Commission for Backward Classes: Role of national commission for backward classesThe issues related to the incorrect inclusion and exclusion of various citizen classes in the Backward Classes list are addressed by the National Commission for Backward Classes. Established by the National Commission for Backward Classes Act of 1993, this body was formed in response to the directives outlined in the Indra Sawhney judgment. According to Section 9(1) of the Act, the Commission's role includes reviewing requests for the inclusion of any citizen class as a Backward Class and addressing grievances regarding overinclusion and underinclusion, subsequently providing advice to the Government as deemed necessary.
   
   The recommendations made by the Commission are generally binding on the Central Government, as stated in Section 9(2). After three years from the Act's implementation, and every subsequent decade thereafter, the Government is required to revise the lists in consultation with the Commission to remove classes that no longer qualify as Backward Classes or to add new classes that meet the criteria (Section 11). Therefore, the concept of backwardness is not static; it is determined by the prevailing factual circumstances, which evolve with social changes. The objective assessment of this status is a duty entrusted to the NCBC.[3]

Legal Framework and Statutory Measures:
SC/ST Act:
Commonly known as the SC/ST Act, is a landmark piece of legislation in India aimed at preventing atrocities against members of the Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST). The Act was enacted to address the historical injustices and widespread discrimination faced by these marginalized communities.

Before India's independence, castebased discrimination and violence against Dalits (formerly known as "Untouchables") and tribal communities were pervasive and institutionalized. The British colonial administration did little to address these deepseated social inequalities.

The Indian Constitution, adopted in 1950, aimed to eliminate castebased discrimination through various provisions, including the abolition of "untouchability" (Article 17) and the guarantee of equality before the law (Article 14). However, despite these constitutional protections, castebased violence and discrimination persisted, particularly in rural areas.

Amendments and Strengthening of the Act:
Over the years, the Act has been amended to address emerging challenges and strengthen its provisions. Notable amendments were made in 2015, which expanded the list of offenses, introduced provisions for witness protection, and made it mandatory for public servants to take prompt action in cases of atrocities.

In 2018, following concerns about the misuse of the Act and a controversial Supreme Court ruling that diluted some of its provisions, Parliament passed another amendment to restore the original stringent provisions and ensure the Act's effective implementation.

Impact and Challenges:
The SC/ST Act has played a crucial role in providing legal protection to marginalized communities and has been a significant tool in the fight against castebased atrocities.

However, challenges remain in its implementation, including issues related to underreporting of cases, delays in the judicial process, and sometimes lack of political will. Despite these challenges, the Act remains a vital instrument in India's legal framework for social justice.

Protection of Civil Rights Act:

• The Act aims to provide protection against discrimination and violence, ensuring that SCs and STs enjoy equal rights and are treated fairly in various aspects of public life, such as education, employment, and access to public places.
• The Act prohibits the practice of untouchability in all forms. It criminalizes the act of enforcing or perpetuating untouchability, including social ostracism and denial of services based on caste.
• The Act provides for the appointment of special officers and enforcement mechanisms to ensure that complaints of discrimination are investigated and addressed promptly. This includes:
  • Special procedures for investigating complaints of discrimination and untouchability.
  • Provision for special courts to handle cases under this Act.
• Over time, various amendments and related legislations have been introduced to strengthen the legal framework for protecting the rights of SCs and STs. Notably, the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, complements the Protection of Civil Rights Act by addressing more severe forms of discrimination and violence. The Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955, represents a foundational legal effort to promote equality and prevent discrimination against marginalized communities in India, working towards a more inclusive society.

Constitutional Provisions:

The Indian Constitution provides a framework to address issues related to caste, focusing on rights, protections, and challenges. Here's an overview of the constitutional provisions relevant to castebased discrimination and protections:

Fundamental Rights:

• Article 15: Prohibits discrimination on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. It allows the State to make special provisions for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or for Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs).
• Article 17: Abolishes "untouchability" and forbids its practice in any form. This provision aims to eliminate the social discrimination faced by certain groups traditionally considered as "untouchables."

Directive Principles of State Policy:

• Article 46: Emphasizes the protection and welfare of SCs and STs, guiding the State to implement policies that address historical injustices and promote their socioeconomic development.

Reservation in Education and Employment:

• Article 15(4) and 15(5): Allow for special provisions for the advancement of SCs and STs in educational institutions and government jobs. These provisions also enable reservation quotas to promote their representation and upliftment.
• Article 16(4) and 16(4A): Provide for reservations in public employment for SCs, STs, and other backward classes to ensure their representation and equal opportunities in government jobs.

Landmark Cases:

N. R. Parmar v. Union of India (2012) 3 SCC 340

The case concerned the criteria for promotions within government services reserved for Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs). N. R. Parmar challenged the validity of reservations in promotions for SCs and STs, questioning whether the reservation policy complied with constitutional and statutory provisions.

The Supreme Court upheld the legality of reservations in promotions for SCs and STs. It emphasized that such reservations must be justified by evidence of backwardness and inadequacy of representation. The Court clarified that while reservations in promotions are permissible, they must be implemented with due regard to the principles of merit and equality, and that empirical data should support the reservation policy.[1]

Arun Kumar Agarwal v. Union of India

This case that addresses the legal perspectives on caste in India, focusing on the rights, protections, and challenges associated with castebased affirmative action. The case involved questioning the constitutionality of castebased reservations in public sector jobs and education.

The Indian Constitution prohibits discrimination based on caste while allowing affirmative action (Articles 15 and 16) to uplift marginalized communities like Scheduled Castes (SCs), Scheduled Tribes (STs), and Other Backward Classes (OBCs).

The Supreme Court upheld the necessity of reservations as a constitutional tool to achieve substantive equality, emphasizing the state's duty to protect and promote the rights of historically disadvantaged groups. The case highlighted the complexities in implementing reservation policies effectively, including ensuring that the intended beneficiaries truly receive the benefits and addressing societal tensions that arise from such policies. The case reaffirms the importance of castebased protections in promoting social justice, while also recognizing the practical challenges in balancing these measures with the broader goal of social cohesion.

Janhit Manch v. Union of India (2014)

The case dealt with the constitutional validity of reservations in promotions for Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) in public employment. The petitioners argued that such reservations violated the principle of equality. The Supreme Court reaffirmed that reservations are a crucial tool for addressing historical discrimination and ensuring equal opportunities for marginalized communities. It emphasized that the Constitution provides for affirmative action to promote substantive equality and social justice. The case highlighted ongoing challenges in balancing castebased reservations with meritbased considerations. The Court also discussed the difficulty in ensuring that reservation benefits reach the most deserving individuals within these communities, without leading to reverse discrimination. The Janhit Manch v. Union of India (2014) case reinforces the necessity of castebased reservations to correct historical injustices and promote equality. However, it also underscores the challenges in implementing these policies effectively, ensuring they serve their intended purpose without compromising the principles of fairness and merit.

Shafin Jahan v. Ashokan K.M. & Ors.

This case concerned the marriage of Hadiya Jahan, a 24yearold medical student who converted to Islam and married Shafin Jahan. Hadiya's father, K.M. Ashokan, filed a writ of habeas corpus before the High Court of Kerala, alleging forceful conversion. The High Court annulled the marriage, claiming that Hadiya was vulnerable and capable of being exploited, and exercised the parens patriae jurisdiction to ensure her welfare. The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred in annulling the marriage as it was beyond the scope of the writ of habeas corpus. The Supreme Court also held that the parens patriae jurisdiction must be exercised only for the benefit of the person in need of protection and not for the benefit of others. The right to marry a person of one's choice is integral to Article 21 (Protection of Life and Personal Liberty), and the Constitution recognises personal autonomy and liberty.

"Social approval for intimate personal decisions is not the basis for recognising them. Indeed, the Constitution protects personal liberty from disapproving audiences. Intimacies of marriage lie within a core zone of privacy, which is inviolable. The absolute right of an individual to choose a life partner is not in the least affected by matters of faith. The Constitution guarantees to each individual the right freely to practise, profess and propagate religion. Choices of faith and belief as indeed choices in matters of marriage lie within an area where individual autonomy is supreme. Neither the state nor the law can dictate a choice of partners or limit the free ability of every person to decide on these matters. They form the essence of personal liberty under the Constitution."

Shayara Bano v. Union of India (Triple Talaq case)

In 2017, the Supreme Court of India heard the landmark case of Shayara Bano v. Union of India, concerning the practice of "triple talaq," an instant divorce method in the Muslim community. Shayara Bano, a woman from Uttarakhand, challenged the constitutionality of triple talaq, claiming it violated her fundamental rights. A fivejudge bench, including Chief Justice JS Khehar, ruled in favor of Shayara Bano, deeming triple talaq unconstitutional and illegal. The court emphasized that personal laws must adhere to constitutional validity and gender justice. The judgment highlighted that practices violating fundamental rights can be struck down, citing Article 14 (Right to Equality) and Article 25(2) of the Constitution.

However, the dissenting opinion of the judgement it was held that: "Religion is a matter of faith, and not of logic. It is not open to a court to accept an egalitarian approach, over a practice which constitutes an integral part of religion. The Constitution allows the followers of every religion, to follow their beliefs and religious traditions. The Constitution assures believers of all faiths, that their way of life, is guaranteed, and would not be subjected to any challenge, even though they may seem to others (and even rationalists, practicing the same faith) unacceptable, in today's world and age. The Constitution extends this guarantee, because faith constitutes the religious consciousness, of the followers. It is this religious consciousness, which binds believers into separate entities. The Constitution endevours to protect and preserve, the beliefs of each of the separate entities, under Article 25."

In view of different opinions recorded, by a majority of 3:2, the prace of Talaqebiddat (Triple Talaq) was set aside. The judgment was widely celebrated as a victory for women's rights and gender justice in India. It was also seen as a step towards a more progressive and inclusive society, where citizens of all religions are equal before the law.

Prathvi Raj Chauhan vs Union of India

The case addressed concerns over the implementation of reservations for Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) in educational institutions and government jobs. The petitioners argued that existing reservation policies were being applied in a way that adversely affected individuals from the general category.

Prithviraj Chauhan and others contended that the reservations for SCs and STs were sometimes extended inappropriately, leading to what they viewed as an imbalance and potential discrimination against nonSC/ST candidates.

The Supreme Court upheld the reservation policies, reaffirming that reservations were a means of promoting social justice and providing equal opportunities to historically disadvantaged groups. The court emphasized the importance of these policies in addressing historical injustices and fostering inclusive development. The ruling reinforced the legitimacy of reservation policies in India and clarified the boundaries of their application, ensuring that the principles of affirmative action are balanced with the need for fair opportunities for all individuals. This case highlights the ongoing debate and legal interpretation surrounding castebased reservations and their impact on different segments of society

Chairman And Managing Director Fci vs Jagdish Balaram Bahira

Jagdish Balram Bahira, an employee of FCI, challenged the denial of promotion based on his caste. He argued that the promotion policy violated his right to equal treatment under the Constitution. Bahira, belonging to a Scheduled Tribe, contested that the promotion policies were discriminatory and that reservations in promotions should be applied uniformly to ensure fairness.

Judgment: The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Bahira, asserting that reservations in promotions for SC/ST employees are constitutional and should be implemented as per existing laws and policies. The court emphasized that the principles of affirmative action and equal opportunity must be balanced and applied correctly. The ruling affirmed the legitimacy of reservation policies in promotions and stressed the importance of adhering to constitutional mandates while implementing such policies to ensure fairness and inclusivity.

Conclusion:
The legal landscape addressing caste discrimination has evolved significantly, with constitutional provisions, statutes, and judicial decisions playing crucial roles in promoting social justice. However, the effectiveness of these measures is often challenged by sociocultural barriers, inadequate awareness, and systemic biases. Addressing these challenges through comprehensive reforms and increased community engagement is essential for ensuring that legal protections translate into meaningful change and progress toward a more equitable society.

End Notes:

1. AIR 2017 SUPREME COURT 3271
2. AIR 2017 SCC 1388
3. AIR 2020 SUPREME COURT 1036
4. 2018 SCC OnLine SC 201
5. (2012) 3 SCC 340
6. [2014] 3 S.C.R. 929
7. Art. 15, The Constitution of India
8. Art. 17, The Constitution of India
9. Art. 46, The Constitution of India
10. Art. 15(4) & 15(5), The Constitution of India
11. Art. 16(4) & 16(4A), The Constitution of India
12. Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955
13. The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
14. P. Ishwara Bhat's, Law & Social Transformation, 505 (1st ed., 2012)
15. P. Ishwara Bhat's, Law & Social Transformation, 503 (1st ed., 2012)
16. P. Ishwara Bhat's, Law & Social Transformation, 509 (1st ed., 2012)
17. P. Ishwara Bhat's, Law & Social Transformation, 493 (1st ed., 2012)
18. Utkarsh Dwivety, Jurisprudence Dalit Jurisprudence, Scribd (19/08/2024), available at https://www.scribd.com/document/482821550/dalitJurisprudence last seen on 19/08/2024.
19. P. Ishwara Bhat's, Law & Social Transformation, 465 (1st ed., 2012)
20. Dr. Navneet Kaur, A Sociological Perspective on caste Base politics in India, Vol. 3, International Journal of Current Research in Education, Culture and Society, No. 1(2019)
21. P. Ishwara Bhat's, Law & Social Transformation, 453 (1st ed., 2012)

Written By: Rupali Vijay Kumbhar, LL.M 2nd Year