#Law

Feb. 3, 2026, 3:48 p.m.

Home
⇔ #Law
⇔ #Religion
⇔ #Politics

Supreme Court Takes Up Challenge to Anti-Conversion Laws

In a significant development, the Supreme Court of India on Monday issued notices to the Central government and 12 state governments following a public interest litigation filed by the National Council of Churches in India (NCCI). The Christian body has challenged the constitutional validity of various state-enacted anti-conversion laws, arguing that they infringe on fundamental rights. The bench, led by Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi, directed the respondents to file counter affidavits within four weeks. This move comes amid growing concerns over the implementation and potential misuse of these laws across multiple states. The court also decided to tag this fresh plea with similar pending petitions, emphasizing the matter's importance by listing it before a three-judge bench.

The PIL, argued by senior advocate Meenakshi Arora on behalf of the NCCI, seeks an immediate stay on the operation of these controversial legislations. Petitioners contend that the laws enable arbitrary actions and persecution, particularly against minority communities engaging in peaceful religious activities. They highlight how provisions in these statutes allegedly incentivize vigilante groups to file baseless complaints, leading to harassment and undue legal burdens on individuals exercising their freedom of faith. This legal battle underscores ongoing tensions between state efforts to curb forced conversions and protections for personal religious liberty in a diverse nation.

Background and Key Arguments in the PIL

Anti-conversion laws, often dubbed "freedom of religion" acts, have been adopted by several states to prohibit conversions through force, fraud, or allurement. States like Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, and others have such statutes on their books, with penalties including imprisonment for violations. For instance, Uttarakhand's law prescribes up to two years in jail for conversions induced by offers of cash, jobs, or material benefits. The NCCI's petition specifically targets laws in 12 states, claiming they violate Articles 21 and 25 of the Constitution, which safeguard the right to life, personal liberty, and freedom of religion.

Critics argue these laws overreach by allowing state interference in private matters of faith and marriage, imposing criminal burdens on individual choices. The plea points out a pattern of misuse, where routine religious practices like distributing literature or preaching lead to arrests and prolonged trials. Recent court rulings in states like Uttar Pradesh have acquitted Christians accused under similar laws, affirming that sharing faith or Bibles does not constitute unlawful conversion. Yet, petitioners say harassment persists, draining time and resources from communities.

senior advocate Meenakshi Arora argued before the bench.

These laws empower the state to intrude into an individual’s personal decision to choose and profess a faith of their choice, thereby undermining core constitutional freedoms guaranteed under Articles 21 and 25, and facilitating persecution through arbitrary action,

Government Response and Pending Proceedings

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, opposed the stay request, noting that similar challenges are already pending and covered by prior Supreme Court judgments from a five-judge Constitution bench. He assured the court that the government's reply was prepared and would be submitted soon. The states, including Rajasthan and Arunachal Pradesh among others, have been asked to serve copies to their Advocate Generals and file a common counter affidavit. This consolidated approach aims to streamline hearings on what has become a recurring judicial flashpoint.

The case joins a batch of earlier petitions, some dating back years, challenging these laws' provisions as vague and prone to abuse. Organizations like Citizens for Justice and Peace have long sought interim relief against the most stringent clauses. While some lower courts have pushed back against misuse—such as acquittals in Uttarakhand cases after scrutiny—the Supreme Court's intervention could set a precedent. Legal experts watch closely, as the outcome may clarify the balance between preventing coercive practices and upholding religious freedoms.

As the matter heads to a three-judge bench, it highlights broader debates on secularism and minority rights in India. The NCCI's push represents voices from Christian communities facing scrutiny under these regimes, even as states defend them as necessary safeguards against alleged proselytization pressures. The four-week deadline for responses sets the stage for deeper scrutiny.

In summary, the Supreme Court's notices mark a crucial step in examining anti-conversion laws' validity, pitting constitutional rights against state regulatory powers, with responses due soon and hearings tagged for a larger bench.