'Sikh Chamar' & 'Ravidaasiya Mochi' Synonymous? Supreme Court Reserves Judgment In MP Navneet Kaur Rana's Caste Certificate Case

In a plea over the cancellation of Amravati MP Navneet Kaur Rana's 'Mochi' caste certificate, the Supreme Court today reserved its judgment.The Bench of Justices JK Maheshwari and Sanjay Karol was hearing Rana's challenge to a Bombay High Court order of 2021, where it was observed that she fraudulently obtained 'Mochi' caste certificate, even though records indicated that she belonged to the caste 'Sikh-Chamar'. Notably, this had led to invalidation of her election from a seat reserved for Scheduled Castes in Maharashtra.Before the top Court, Rana's case had been that her forefathers belonged to the Sikh-Chamar caste, wherein 'Sikh' is a religious pre-fix and does not pertain to the caste. It was her contention that she belongs to the caste 'Chamar'.For a detailed background as well as report on the previous hearing, click here. The submissions addressed before the Court today are captured below. Respondents' SubmissionsIn today's hearing, the arguments on behalf of respondents were led by Advocate-on-Record Shadan Farasat.He started by showing how the three documents relied upon by Rana during her 'Mochi' caste claim verification, ie self school leaving certificate (SLC), her father's school leaving certificate and father's caste certificate, were knocked out by the Scrutiny Committee and the decision to that extent was never challenged by Rana.(i) Rana's SLC: It was apprised that during enquiry, the same was found to be fabricated. "While making verification of the said document, when the Vigilance Squad visited the concerned school, it was told that the said document was issued by the school only. But the applicant gave application on the date of 23.08.2013 for secondary certificate and requested to mention the word Mochi in it", Farasat read from records. He submitted that not taking the document to be an original record, Rana's SLC was held inadmissible. Further, he alleged that Rana's husband used his political power insofar as her SLC was concerned.(ii) Rana's father's SLC: It was claimed that this document was held inadmissible because it could not be verified by the Vigilance Squad that it was issued by the concerned school. "When the Vigilance Squad visited the school and made verification of the said document, no name of Harbhajan Singh Ram Singh Kundles was found at serial number 281 on the general register...also, the Education Officer has informed the complainant...that the said document has not been issued by the concerned school", read Farasat from the records. To support the allegation of fabrication, he pointed out that the SLC pertained to 1960, even though the concerned school started in 1964.(iii) Rana's father's caste certificate: It was urged that Rana's father's original caste certificate (for 'Mochi') was of July, 2013, which was cancelled in 2017 by the same Committee that approved the caste certificate for Rana (that too, on the very day her father's certificate was cancelled). Questioning how Rana could be granted a Mochi caste certificate when it was denied to her father, the counsel alleged that "collusion with the Caste Scrutiny Committee is writ large".Reliance was placed on another contemporaneous document, that is Rana's original school admission form, to emphasize that instead of Scheduled Castes, she belonged to OBC (other backward classes) category. Farasat highlighted that in the "Caste/Sub-Caste/Religion" section of the form, which was signed by Rana's mother, only "Sikh" was mentioned. Further, in response to the question "whether a member of Scheduled Caste/Tribe and documentary evidence thereof?", the answer was "NA" (not applicable) and "BC" (backward class). "Entire case is an afterthought of making her a Scheduled Caste and then to succeed in a reserved constituency", the counsel pressed.On a specific Court query, it was informed that though the above document (Rana's original school admission form) was placed before the Scrutiny Committee, it did not deal with the same.It was further contended that Rana was contradicting her own application. "In the verification form itself, she says that my family migrated in 1946 from Punjab, so where is the question thereafter to submit documents of 1932 of Bombay saying that so and so was resident in Bombay?", Farasat asked.Moving on, he drew the Court's attention to two other documents, ie Rana's mother's ration card and her own birth certificate, which were not brought forth during the verification process but relied upon for obtaining original caste certificate. He pled that these documents were interpolated and the High Court went into facts of the case noting the extent of "fraud". It was further underscored that the matter calls for a prosecution (as opposed to simple dismissal), as Rana claimed under oath that all five documents submitted for 'Mochi' caste certificate were valid, which has been subsequently found to be untrue.Underlining that the Verification Committee equated 'Sikh-Chamar' with 'Mochi', even when...

'Sikh Chamar' & 'Ravidaasiya Mochi' Synonymous? Supreme Court Reserves Judgment In MP Navneet Kaur Rana's Caste Certificate Case

Debby Jain

Tags