Yes, Jain literature does mention jāti (social groups/communities), but the way it is used and understood is different from how Buddhist texts use jāti in the context of “caste” and also from how society uses it.

1. In principle: Jain Dharma does not give spiritual importance to jāti

• Jain philosophy is very clear:

- Every jīva (soul) is equal in its potential for moksha. - Liberation depends on karma, right faith, right knowledge and right conduct, not on birth, caste, or family. ( jainknowledge.com)

• So any jāti / varṇa is only a social fact, never a spiritual category.

2. In scriptures and narratives: jāti appears as description of society

In stories (itihās, purāṇas, caritras), you do find references like:

• Kings, princes, merchants, artisans, etc.
• Sometimes words like kṣatriya, brāhmaṇa, vaiśya appear, because Jain texts are describing the existing Indian social order of that time.
• This is similar to how Buddhist texts also mention social classes—but Jain texts keep repeating that birth does not give spiritual superiority.

So: yes, jāti/varna is mentioned, but mainly:

• To describe characters’ worldly background (like “this king was from such community”).
• To show that, despite their birth, they attained spiritual progress only through vratas, tapa, and samyaktva, not because of their jāti.

3. Jain view on caste / jāti overall

Later Jain society developed many Jain jātis (Oswal, Porwal, Agarwal, etc.), which function socially (marriage groups, customs), but:

• These are community identities, not religious requirements.
• Both Digambar and Śvetāmbara traditions agree that no jāti has higher spiritual status. ( jainknowledge.com)

You can read a simple explanation of caste and jati in Jainism here: “Jainism and caste system”

Summary:

• Jain literature does mention jāti/varna, but only as part of social/historical description.
• Jain doctrine clearly says: spiritual path is independent of jāti; all souls are equal in capacity for moksha.