Today, On 16th September, The Supreme Court has listed petitions challenging anti-conversion laws across multiple states, raising concerns about interfaith marriages, freedom of religion, and civil liberties in India, with states given four weeks to file replies.
The Delhi High Court refused to certify filmmaker Shyam Bharteey’s Masoom Kaatil, ruling that films mocking religions, glorifying violence, and promoting disharmony cannot be allowed in a secular society. Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora said such content risks public peace and corrupts young minds.
Former Supreme Court judge Justice Abhay Oka highlights how environmental damage in the name of faith violates fundamental rights, stating, “No religion allows you to pollute.”
The Supreme Court Today (July 15) dismissed a plea seeking to cancel AIMIM’s political status. However, it allowed the petitioner to raise wider concerns about religion-based politics.
The Supreme Court will decide on July 14 whether political and religious groups can use the national flag for campaigns or rituals, raising questions about national flag misuse in India.
Kerala High Court Justice VG Arun while speaking at an event organised by the Kerala Yukthivadi Sangam said, “children without religion and caste are the hope for a good future”.
Lawyer Prashant Bhushan says government funding for religious yatras like Kanwar and Haj is against the Constitution. Delhi CM Rekha Gupta defends direct fund transfer to boost transparency and avoid corruption.
The Kerala High Court ruled that anyone who changes religion voluntarily has the right to update this in school records. This decision strengthens the personal freedom granted under Article 25 of the Indian Constitution.
Today, On 30th April, The Supreme Court said, “We have to hear other side first then,” as it scheduled the hearing on pleas against anti-conversion laws in May, stressing the importance of hearing all sides before giving any ruling.
The Karnataka High Court urged Parliament and State legislatures to bring in a Uniform Civil Code. The Court stated that such a code would uphold justice for women and promote equality across all castes and religions. It emphasized the importance of individual dignity and fraternity. The suggestion aims to foster a more unified and fair legal framework for all citizens.
