Supreme Court Today (July 16) asked the Uttar Pradesh government to respond to a legal challenge on the 2024 amendments to its religious conversion law. Petitioners claim it violates key rights and is vague and unfair.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India on Wednesday asked the Uttar Pradesh (UP) government to reply to a legal petition filed against the recently amended law from 2024 which deals with unlawful religious conversions.
A bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta issued a formal notice to the state government, asking it to present its side.
The Court has also grouped this case with other similar cases already pending before it. These other cases also question the legality and fairness of various anti-conversion laws.
This petition was filed by Roop Rekha Verma, an academician from Lucknow, along with others. The petitioners are challenging the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, which was amended in 2024.
They have called some parts of this amended law “vague and overly broad” and said that this confusion goes against the right to free speech and the right to spread religious beliefs.
During the hearing, the UP state lawyer informed the Court that similar cases are already being heard by a bench led by the Chief Justice of India. However, the petitioners’ lawyer made it clear that this case is specifically against only the 2024 amendments to the law, and not the entire law.
Earlier, on May 2, the Supreme Court had already agreed to take a closer look at this case.
The plea was submitted through Advocate Purnima Krishna. It argues that the amended law violates several key rights given by the Indian Constitution — such as Article 14 (equality before law), Article 19 (freedom of speech and expression), Article 21 (right to life and personal liberty), and Article 25 (freedom of religion).
The plea says that Sections 2 and 3 of the law are “vague, overly broad, and lack clear standards”, which makes it hard for people to understand what actually counts as a crime.
“This ambiguity infringes 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 petition stated.
The plea warned that such confusion in the law allows authorities to misuse power, target people unfairly, and especially go after those who are peacefully practicing or spreading their faith.
It emphasized that laws which involve punishment must be written clearly to avoid wrong use by police or other government officials. Without this, innocent people may suffer unnecessary legal trouble.
Another major concern in the petition is that the amendment allows more people to file complaints without adding strong legal checks or safeguards. This can result in misuse of the law.
“The law presumes mal-intent behind all religious conversions and views adult individuals with suspicion, thereby reducing them to subjects whose personal decisions must be validated by the state,”
-it added.
The petition also strongly objected to the punishment mentioned in the law, calling it “excessive” and saying it doesn’t match the nature of the alleged crime.
“The government, by assuming the role of protector of religious identities, encroaches on the individual’s right to choose their faith,”
-the petition argued.
The plea also highlighted how Section 5 of the law unfairly targets women by assuming they are always at risk of forced religious conversion.
This, the plea says, reinforces harmful stereotypes and hurts women’s freedom to make their own decisions.
“It is wrongly assumed all women, regardless of their background, are vulnerable to illegal conversions, reinforcing harmful stereotypes undermining their autonomy.”
At present, the Supreme Court is already handling many petitions that question similar religious conversion laws made by different states. This UP case has now been added to that list for detailed hearing in the future.
Would You Like Assistance In Drafting A Legal Notice Or Complaint?
CLICK HERE
Click Here to Read Our Reports on CJI BR Gavai
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Justice Yashwant Varma
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
