Persistence of Untouchability Despite Constitutional and Legal Safeguards

Syllabus: GS2/ Social Justice

Context

• The purifying ceremony in Uttarakhand in August 2026 has reignited the discussion over the survival of untouchability despite constitutional and legal safeguards.

What is Untouchability?

• Untouchability is a historically entrenched form of caste-based exclusion based on ritual of purity and pollution. 
• It involves denying individuals equal access to social spaces, resources and opportunities because of their caste identity.

Provisions Against Untouchability

• Constitutional Provisions: 
  • Article 15: No citizen shall, on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them, be subject to any disability, liability, restriction or condition with regard to;
    • access to shops, public restaurants, hotels and places of public entertainment; or
    • the use of wells, tanks, bathing ghats, roads and places of public resort maintained wholly or partly out of State funds or dedicated to the use of the general public.
  • Article 17 has abolished the practice of untouchability in all its forms.
• Legal Framework: 
  • Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955 penalises the practice of untouchability and the enforcement of associated disabilities.
  • The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, prevents the commission of offences of atrocities against the members of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes, to provide for the trial of such offences and for the relief and rehabilitation of the victims of such offences.

Factors Behind the Persistence of Untouchability

• Sociological Factors: 
  • Purity and Pollution: Traditional beliefs associating certain castes with impurity continue to sustain social exclusion.
  • Caste as a System of Social Reproduction: Family structures, kinship networks and social customs perpetuate caste hierarchies across generations.
  • Endogamy: Restrictions on inter-caste marriages reinforce caste identities and social divisions.
• Cultural Factor: 
  • Normalisation of Discrimination: Practices such as separate utensils, segregated seating and restrictions on temple entry are sometimes justified as customary traditions.
• Economic Factors: 
  • Caste–Class Intersection: Landlessness, insecure employment and economic dependence on dominant caste groups discourage victims from challenging discrimination.
  • Occupational segregation: The persistence of manual scavenging and hazardous sanitation work illustrates how caste-based occupational exclusion can survive despite legal prohibitions and rehabilitation measures.

Key Judicial Intervention

• Devarajiah v. B. Padmanna (1957): The Mysore High Court ruled that “untouchability” under Article 17 cannot be interpreted in its literal or grammatical sense.
  • Instead, it refers specifically to the historical system of caste-based social disabilities imposed on individuals purely by virtue of their birth.
• State of Karnataka v. Appa Balu Ingale (1992): The Supreme Court held that the caste system must be totally dismantled for democracy and human dignity, emphasising the rigorous enforcement of the Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955.
• Surya Narayan Choudhary v. State of Rajasthan (1988): The Rajasthan High Court ruled that imposing caste-specific, ritualistic conditions for temple entry is a direct form of untouchability.
  • It held that conditions cannot be placed on one section of society if they are not applied to everyone else.
• Sukanya Shantha v. Union of India (2024): The Supreme Court held that Article 17 extends beyond physical exclusion to any discriminatory treatment based on presence or touch.

Measures Required Beyond Legal Prohibition

• Reform education: Incorporate equality, dignity and anti-caste social reform into curricula and sensitise teachers against discriminatory practices.
• Promote social integration: Encourage shared public facilities, inclusive neighbourhoods and inter-caste social interaction to weaken everyday caste boundaries.
• Introduce accessible civil remedies: Consider effective mechanisms for addressing discrimination and securing remedies, alongside criminal prosecution where offences occur.
• Strengthen enforcement: Ensure prompt registration of complaints, impartial investigation, time-bound trials and effective victim protection.

Source: TH