The Allahabad High Court has ruled that changing religion does not automatically end a person's status as a member of a Scheduled Tribe, while stressing that continued tribal identity must be established from the facts of each case.
In its 14 September order, the court said that "change of religion does not ipso facto terminate Scheduled Tribe status". However, Justice Arun Kumar dismissed a petition brought by a tribal woman who had married a Muslim man, finding that she had not shown that she continued to maintain her tribal identity after decades of living within a different religious and social setting.
The petitioner, identified as Nanhki, also known as Naimunnisha, was born into the Bhuiyan community, which is recognised as a Scheduled Tribe. Scheduled Tribe status provides constitutional and legal protections, including access to affirmative measures in areas such as education, employment and political representation.
The case concerned agricultural land that Nanhki had purchased in Sonbhadra district. Revenue authorities had declared the transactions invalid, arguing that she could not purchase land restricted to members of Scheduled Tribes because she was no longer a member of the tribal community.
A revenue order dated 22 January 2026 referred to her marriage to a Muslim man, her use of the name Naimunnisha, the fact that she had raised her children as Muslims and evidence that she had become separated from her tribal community. Under the applicable law, transfers of land belonging to members of Scheduled Tribes are restricted.
Nanhki argued that her tribal status was acquired by birth and that the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950 does not contain a provision removing Scheduled Tribe status simply because a person changes religion.
The High Court accepted the broader legal principle that conversion alone does not automatically remove Scheduled Tribe status. It said, however, that whether a person continues to belong to a Scheduled Tribe is ultimately a question of fact.
The court said factors including tribal customs, traditions, social organisation, participation in community life and acceptance by the tribal community can be considered when determining whether tribal identity has continued.
In Nanhki's case, the court concluded that she had not provided sufficient evidence of an ongoing connection with the Bhuiyan community. It therefore upheld the orders declaring her land purchases invalid.
The ruling has drawn attention from Christian and tribal advocates because of wider debates over the rights of indigenous people who change religion.
A C Michael, a Catholic leader and former member of the Delhi state minority commission, told UCA News that the court had upheld the legal position that conversion alone does not cause a person to lose Scheduled Tribe status. He also expressed concern about campaigns by some Hindu nationalist groups seeking to remove welfare benefits from tribal people who convert to Christianity or Islam.
More than 60 per cent of India's estimated 27 million Christians are from tribal or other socially disadvantaged communities, according to the source report.
Some Hindu groups argue that tribal people who leave their traditional faith should no longer receive certain affirmative benefits. Gulzar Singh Markam, a tribal leader from Madhya Pradesh, however, said tribal status can continue after conversion unless a person explicitly abandons the culture and practices of the community.
"Tribal communities accept a person as their own even after conversion to any religion," Markam told UCA News.
He also said the court's ruling was significant because it made clear that people who no longer follow the customs and traditions of their tribal community cannot rely on tribal status solely for material benefits.
The judgment therefore distinguishes between two separate questions: whether conversion itself ends Scheduled Tribe status, and whether an individual has continued to maintain the tribal identity required to retain that status in a particular case. The court answered the first question in the negative but found against the petitioner on the evidence before it.
Based on reporting by UCA News.
