The Supreme Court Agrees to Consider a Plea Challenging the U.P. Law on Unlawful Religious Conversion
The Supreme Court on Friday (May 2, 2025) agreed to consider a plea challenging the constitutional validity of the 2024 amended Uttar Pradesh law on "unlawful religious conversion."
A Bench of Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justices Sanjay Kumar and K.V. Viswanathan took note of the submissions of senior lawyer S Muralidhar, who argued that certain provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, as amended in 2024, were "vague and overly broad" and infringed upon free speech and religious propagation.
The CJI, however, did not issue a notice on the plea for now and said it will be heard along with other pending petitions on May 13.
The top court was hearing a PIL filed by Roop Rekha Verma, who hails from Lucknow, and others against the amended law. The plea, filed through advocate Purnima Krishna, alleged the law infringed upon Articles 14 (equality before the law), 19 (freedom of speech and expression), 21 (right to life and personal liberty), and 25 (freedom of religion) of the Constitution.
Sections 2 and 3 of the Act, it claimed, were "vague, overly broad, and lack clear standards" which made it difficult to determine what constituted an offense. This ambiguity infringed upon free speech and religious propagation, enabling arbitrary enforcement and discriminatory application. Penal laws must be precise; vague provisions violate constitutional principles by granting excessive discretion to authorities, failing to provide reasonable notice, and risking wrongful prosecution of innocent individuals.
The plea further said penal laws must be defined with precision to prevent misuse by authorities and avoid the wrongful prosecution of innocent citizens. It said the key concern is that the 2024 amendment expands the category of individuals authorized to file complaints without incorporating procedural safeguards.
The plea challenged the proportionality of the prescribed punishment, which it said were "excessive." It said, "The government, by assuming the role of protector of religious identities, encroaches on the individual’s right to choose their faith." The lack of procedural safeguards, it said, subjects the accused and their families to prolonged legal battles, financial burdens, and social stigma, despite no substantive evidence of wrongdoing.
The plea argued that such an approach disregards the necessity for criminal laws to be clear, precise, and narrowly tailored to prevent wrongful prosecution. Referring to Section 5 of the law, the plea said, it is wrongly assumed all women, regardless of their background, are vulnerable to illegal conversions, reinforcing harmful stereotypes undermining their autonomy.
The plea argued that this gender-based presumption contradicts constitutional principles. Furthermore, the Act erodes the fundamental presumption of innocence by imposing a reverse burden of proof, unfairly shifting the onus onto the accused and increasing the risk of wrongful convictions, thereby violating procedural fairness in criminal law.
The top court is seized of various petitions challenging the validity of various state laws on religious conversions.
Reference : https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/uttar-pradesh/supreme-court-agrees-to-hear-pil-against-amended-up-law-on-religious-conversion/article69530359.ece
