PolitySocial_Issues
News 5 of 25

SC on Article 17: Purification Ritual After Dalit Use Raises Untouchability Question

Target:UPSC GS-IIMPSCTeachingSSC GAPrelims HighMains HighStatic GK Link
02 Sept 2026
~2 min
Source: The Hindu
Key Data:Article 17Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955Sukanya Shantha v Union of India (2024)Surya Narayan Choudhary v State of Rajasthan (1988)Section 7(1)(d)SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
Bodies:Supreme CourtRajasthan High Court
Practice MCQs from today's news ▸
What This Article Covers

1.A shuddhikaran ritual at Haldwani after a Dalit leader's rally raises whether 'purification' of a place constitutes untouchability under Article 17.

2.The Supreme Court in Sukanya Shantha v Union of India (2024) held that Article 17 rejects caste-based ideas of purity and pollution and applies to stigma attached to a person's touch or presence.

3.The Rajasthan High Court in Surya Narayan Choudhary v State of Rajasthan (1988) ruled that caste-specific purification as a condition for temple entry violates Articles 14, 15, and 17.

The Big Picture
Prelims · HighMains · High

A purification ritual at Haldwani after Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge's rally has reignited the legal debate on untouchability. The Supreme Court's 2024 ruling in Sukanya Shantha case links Article 17 to caste-based notions of 'purity and pollution', extending its reach beyond denial of entry to discriminatory acts based on touch or presence.

Exam Lens

Quick Exam Facts From News

Constitutional ArticleArticle 17 - Abolition of Untouchability
Enabling LegislationProtection of Civil Rights Act, 1955 (formerly Untouchability (Offences) Act, 1955)
Key SC Case (2024)Sukanya Shantha v Union of India
Key HC Case (1988)Surya Narayan Choudhary v State of Rajasthan
Related ActSC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989

1-Minute Revision

  • ›Constitutional Article: Article 17 - Abolition of Untouchability
  • ›Enabling Legislation: Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955 (formerly Untouchability (Offences) Act, 1955)
  • ›Target this Data: Article 17 abolishes untouchability and is enforceable against non-State actors.
  • ›Target this Legal Point: Section 7(1)(d) of the Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955 punishes insults on the ground of untouchability.
  • ›Target this Case: Sukanya Shantha v Union of India (2024) - SC held Article 17 rejects caste-based notions of purity and pollution.

Mastered this topic? Test your knowledge with a full MCQ quiz.

Practice exam-style questions, track your score, and strengthen your recall.

Q1Static LinkageEasy

Which constitutional article is the basis for the Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955?

Q2Statement-basedHard

Consider the following statements:

1. Article 17 of the Constitution defines 'untouchability' in explicit terms.

2. The Supreme Court in Sukanya Shantha v Union of India (2024) held that Article 17 rejects caste-based notions of purity and pollution.

3. The Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955 was originally enacted as the Untouchability (Offences) Act, 1955.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Q3Data-centricMedium

Under which section of the Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955 is insulting a member of a Scheduled Caste on the ground of untouchability punishable?

Q4Application/ImpactMedium

What is the primary legal test to determine whether a 'purification' ritual after a Dalit person's use of a venue amounts to untouchability under Article 17?

All 25 MCQs ▸
You finished this topic
Explore Related Topics
Related Current Affairs
Polity Current Affairs

Govt to SC: Only Parliament Can Extend Creamy Layer to SC/ST; Cites Article 341, E V Chinnaiah Case

The government has told the Supreme Court that extending the creamy layer principle to SC/ST is a policy decision for Parliament alone. This reaffirms that reservation for SC/ST is based on historical social criteria, not just economic status, and the creamy layer concept currently applies only to OBCs.

Polity Current Affairs

Supreme Court Takes Suo Motu Cognisance of Delhi-NCR Sexual Assaults, Cites Article 21 and Nirbhaya Parallel

The Supreme Court has taken suo motu cognisance of recent sexual assault cases in Delhi-NCR, flagging lax patrolling and administrative failures that make public spaces 'zones of high risk'. The court invoked Article 21 (right to life and personal liberty) and drew a painful parallel to the 2012 Nirbhaya case, demanding accountability and a measurable response from authorities. This has major implications for law enforcement accountability, women's safety, and judicial oversight.

Polity Current Affairs

SC Reviews UGC Equity Regulations 2026: Caste Discrimination Definition in Question

The Centre is reconsidering the UGC (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations, 2026 after the Supreme Court stayed them, citing ambiguities in the definition of 'caste-based discrimination'. This has political and constitutional implications, especially with upcoming UP elections, making it a high-yield topic for both Prelims and Mains.

Polity Current Affairs

Patna HC Rules Religious Freedom Under Article 25 Subject to Public Order and Morality

Patna High Court holds that the right to profess and practise religion under Article 25 is not absolute and can be restricted for public order, morality, and health. This reiterates the essential religious practices doctrine and clarifies that constitutional protection does not extend to every mode of exercise. A plea for 300 devotees in a religious procession in Siwan, Bihar, was dismissed citing past law-and-order incidents.

Polity Current Affairs

SC Quashes NEET Protest FIRs Under Article 142, Orders Compensation Policy for Suicide Victims

Supreme Court used Article 142 to quash all FIRs registered against NEET protesters across India, while ordering compensation policy for families of students who died by suicide. This judgment underscores the balance between protest rights and criminal liability, and the government's commitment to address exam leak issues.

Polity Current Affairs

Supreme Court Rules NCSC Cannot Issue Binding Directions Under Article 338

The Supreme Court clarified that the National Commission for Scheduled Castes (NCSC) has only recommendatory and advisory powers under Article 338, not adjudicatory powers. It cannot issue binding orders in service disputes. This ruling sets boundaries for constitutional commissions under Articles 338, 338A, and 338B.

Polity Current Affairs

SC Recognises Student Mental Health Under Article 21 in Sukdeb Saha (2025); NEET Paper Leak Tests Institutional Responsibility

The Supreme Court has expanded the right to life (Article 21) to include student mental health, holding institutions responsible for student suicides under Sukdeb Saha v. State of Andhra Pradesh (2025). The NEET paper leak of 2026 becomes the first major test of this new constitutional principle, forcing the state to move beyond individual controversies toward structural reform in examinations and recruitment.

Polity Current Affairs

SC Upholds Clinical Establishments Rules 2012: Price Range Fixing Under Article 47

The Union Health Ministry defended the constitutional validity of the 2012 Clinical Establishments Rules before the Supreme Court, arguing that price regulation of healthcare services is essential to fulfill the mandate of Article 47 (DPSP). This is a key case for understanding the balance between fundamental rights (Article 19(1)(g)) and reasonable restrictions in the interest of public health.