Pre-Independence Documentary Evidence Trumps Affinity Test
Comprehensive Commentary on Yogesh Madhav Makalwad v. State of Maharashtra (2025 INSC 964)

1. Introduction

The Supreme Court’s decision in Yogesh Madhav Makalwad v. State of Maharashtra (Civil Appeal No. ___/2025 arising out of SLP (C) No. 27410/2024, decided on 12 Aug 2025) settles a recurring controversy that haunts Scheduled Tribe (ST) certificate scrutiny in Maharashtra and several other States: should greater weight be placed on antiquated documentary evidence, or on the so-called “affinity test” that analyses anthropological traits?

The appellant, a medical college aspirant, anchored his claim of belonging to the Koli Mahadev Scheduled Tribe primarily on a 1943 school record of his grandfather. Both the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee (Aurangabad Division) and the Bombay High Court dismissed his claim, relying heavily on an inconclusive handwriting report and his failure in the affinity test. The Supreme Court reversed, emphasising:

• The superior probative value of pre-Independence documents in caste/tribe determination; and
• The non-conclusive nature of the affinity test, which cannot by itself defeat an otherwise credible documentary trail.

This judgment harmonises and strengthens earlier dicta in Anand v. Committee for Scrutiny & Verification of Tribe Claims (2012) and Maharashtra Adiwasi Thakur Jamat Swarakshan Samiti (2023), creating a clear hierarchical approach to evidence in ST verification inquiries.

2. Summary of the Judgment

The Court (CJI B. R. Gavai, with Justices Satish Chandra Sharma & K. Vinod Chandran concurring) allowed the appeal and:

1. Set aside the Bombay High Court’s judgment dated 23 Jul 2024 and the Scrutiny Committee’s order dated 24 Jun 2019.
2. Declared the appellant to be a member of the Koli Mahadev Scheduled Tribe.
3. Directed the Scrutiny Committee to issue a caste validity certificate within six weeks.

Key holdings include:

• Pre-Independence documentary evidence — here, a 1943 school register — carries “greater probative value” than post-Independence or recent records.
• The affinity test is not a litmus test; it may corroborate but cannot outweigh credible documentary evidence.
• Courts and committees must adopt a “cautious approach” when discarding early-era records on mere suspicion of interpolation.

3. Analysis

3.1 Precedents Cited and Their Influence

1. Anand v. Committee for Scrutiny & Verification of Tribe Claims, (2012) 1 SCC 113
   • Laid down the foundational dual test: (i) documentary scrutiny with greater reliance on pre-Independence records, and (ii) affinity test as supportive, not decisive.
   • The present Bench quotes paragraph 22 of Anand extensively, making it central to its ratio.
2. Maharashtra Adiwasi Thakur Jamat Swarakshan Samiti v. State of Maharashtra, (2023) 16 SCC 4
   • Reiterated that the affinity test is neither mandatory nor conclusive and must be read with other material.
   • Cited to buttress the Court’s scepticism of affinity-only rejections.
3. (Implicit) Kumari Madhuri Patil v. Additional Commissioner, (1994) 6 SCC 241
   • Though not expressly quoted, its procedural framework for vigilance enquiry and scrutiny committees underpins Maharashtra practice.
   • The present judgment implicitly refines how committees must weigh documentary evidence within that framework.

3.2 Legal Reasoning Employed

The Court’s reasoning unfolds in four steps:

1. Scrutiny of the 1943 Record
   • Using even a magnifying glass in open court, the Bench found the entry “Koli Mahadev” in uniform ink and handwriting, discounting interpolation suspicion.
2. Hierarchy of Evidence
   • Pre-Independence material outranks modern documents because colonial-era record-keepers had no incentive to manipulate Scheduled Tribe status (reservations did not then exist).
   • Other records (school registers of father and uncle) flowed naturally from the 1943 baseline, forming a consistent chain.
3. Re-characterisation of the Affinity Test
   • Acknowledges socio-cultural evolution: migration, modernisation, and assimilation dilute traditional tribal traits.
   • Therefore, failure to answer questions on deity, rituals, or burial customs cannot negate strong documentary ancestry.
4. Error Correction Duty
   • High Court’s dismissal was predicated on lack of “validated” documents; but the very validation process was tainted by erroneous evidentiary weighting, necessitating appellate correction.

3.3 Potential Impact on Future Litigation and Policy

• Stronger Shield for Legacy Documents: Applicants nationwide can anchor their claims on early 20th-century or earlier documents with renewed confidence.
• Recalibrated Scrutiny Committee Protocols: Committees will need to revise internal guidelines to place documentary verification before (or at least co-equal with) the affinity test.
• Reduction in Arbitrary Rejections: Many past invalidations hinged solely on failed affinity tests; this precedent paves the way for review petitions and curative relief.
• Technological Implications: Emphasis on meticulous forensic inspection (including magnification) signals the Court’s willingness to apply simple but rigorous science rather than speculative doubts.
• Educational & Employment Reservations: Institutions must anticipate an increase in validated ST certificates, affecting seat distribution and roster calculations.

4. Complex Concepts Simplified

Scrutiny Committee

A statutory body (in Maharashtra, constituted under the Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De-Notified Tribes, (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of) Caste Certificate Act, 2000) that verifies the authenticity of caste / tribe certificates.

Affinity Test

An anthropological questionnaire and field enquiry that examines whether an individual exhibits traditional cultural traits, marriage customs, dialect, and rituals associated with a particular tribe.

Probative Value

The evidentiary strength or persuasive quality of a piece of evidence. Higher probative value means courts give it more weight.

Pre-Independence Document

A document generated before 15 August 1947. Courts treat such documents as less likely to be fabricated for reservation benefits that did not then exist.

Interpolation

Insertion of additional words or figures in an already written document, often amounting to tampering. An inconclusive handwriting report cannot automatically invalidate a document.

5. Conclusion

Makawlad crystallises a two-tier evidentiary rule for caste/tribe verification:

“Authentic pre-Independence documentary evidence creates a strong presumption of caste status that can be rebutted only by cogent proof of fabrication; the anthropological affinity test may corroborate but cannot, by itself, dislodge such evidence.”

By reaffirming and sharpening the dicta in Anand and Thakur Jamat, the Supreme Court places clear guardrails against over-zealous or culturally static interpretations of tribal identity. The judgment not only gives the appellant his rightful access to medical education but also lights a jurisprudential beacon for thousands of similarly situated candidates. In broader terms, it advances the constitutional promise of equality by ensuring that procedural gatekeeping mechanisms do not devolve into substantive injustice.