Prayagraj- Reinforcing that caste identity remains fixed by birth, the Allahabad High Court dismissed a criminal appeal challenging the summoning of nine accused under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, and related IPC sections.

The case stemmed from a complaint filed by a woman from the SC/ST community, originally from West Bengal, who alleged that the appellants assaulted her, trespassed into her home, used casteist abuses, and committed outraging of modesty during an altercation on the same day that the appellants had lodged a counter FIR against her and her family members.

The appellants argued they were falsely implicated as a counterblast to their earlier FIR under various IPC sections, where they claimed injuries to their family. They further contended that the complainant, having married a man from the Jat community, had lost her original SC/ST caste status and could no longer invoke protections under the SC/ST Act. They asserted: a woman, after marrying a person of another caste, loses her original caste which she held since birth and thereafter belongs to the caste of her husband. Hence, summoning the appellants for the alleged offences, as well as under the SC/ST Act, is unsustainable and liable to be set aside.

However, Justice Anil Kumar-X, after hearing arguments from both sides, rejected these claims. The court noted that the trial court had properly considered the complainant's statements, witness accounts, and injury reports before summoning the accused for offences under Sections 323, 506, 452, and 354 of the IPC, along with Section 3(1)(R) of the SC/ST Act.

On the existence of a cross-case, the court observed, "The existence of a cross-case does not constitute a ground to discard a complaint filed by the opposite party on a rival version." It added that the trial court committed no illegality in proceeding with the summons.

Addressing the core argument on caste, the bench delivered a clear pronouncement aligned with established legal precedents: "Though a person may change religion, his or her caste remains the same despite conversion to another religion. Hence, marriage does not change a person’s caste. Therefore, the said contention is unsustainable."

The court emphasized that caste is determined at birth and remains unaltered by marriage or inter-caste unions, dismissing the appeal in full on February 10.