Cross in home no proof of conversion to Christianity, rules Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has ruled that the presence of a Cross or a statue of Jesus Christ inside a residence cannot be treated as proof that a person converted to Christianity or gave up their Hindu caste identity.

In a recent judgment, the Nagpur bench comprising Justices Mukulika Jawalkar and Nandesh Deshpande said allegations of religious conversion must be backed by concrete documentary evidence and cannot be inferred merely from religious symbols kept in a household.

“Any allegation of conversion must be supported by documentation of baptism rituals or a baptism certificate,” the judges observed.


The ruling came while hearing a petition filed by an Akola-based college student challenging the rejection of his application for a Scheduled Caste certificate by the Akola Caste Scrutiny Committee. The committee had concluded that the student’s forefathers had converted to Christianity and therefore he was not entitled to a Dalit caste certificate.

Authorities had based their decision on the presence of a Cross and images of Christ in the family’s house, along with a school record from 1962 describing the family as Christian.

However, the court held that such circumstances alone could not establish a change of religion. The bench said the scrutiny committee must examine whether formal religious conversion rituals actually took place before arriving at such a conclusion.

During the proceedings, the petitioner argued that his family had never formally converted to Christianity. According to the submissions, his grandfather had described himself as Christian in school records during his student years to avoid caste-based discrimination, even though no religious conversion had taken place.

The petitioner also placed on record several documents, including school and government records, as well as a caste validity certificate earlier issued to a relative recognising the family’s Scheduled Caste status.

After examining the material, the court found the reasoning adopted by the authorities legally untenable. Describing the decision of the scrutiny committee as “patently erroneous” and “perverse”, the bench set aside the order rejecting the student’s application.

The court subsequently directed the authorities to issue a Scheduled Caste certificate to the petitioner within two months.