The Supreme Court on Friday refused a plea to refer to the Law Commission of India the question whether “forcible conversion” should be made a separate offence relating to religion under the Indian Penal Code.
“Why should we go about referring this to the Law Commission?” Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud asked.
The Chief Justice’s query was in response to a submission by senior advocate Arvind Datar, appearing for Ashwini Upadhyay, that forcible conversion ought to be made an offence under Chapter 15 (offences relating to religion) in the Penal Code.
Senior advocate Dushyant Dave, opposing Mr. Upadhyay, said the latter’s petition that “deceitful and forcible religious conversion” was rampant in India was a vexatious one. He said the petition contained “unpalatable” remarks about minority religions.
“Mr. Datar, you are appearing as an officer of the court. There are objectionable statements in the writ petition. Please have a look… Argue the petition on the question of law or whatever your rights are… There is a certain sanctity to petitions filed here,” Chief Justice Chandrachud said.
The exchange came after Mr. Datar said his client had opted to withdraw an additional affidavit filed after the court had previously asked him to remove disparaging comments made in it.
“I have objections to the writ petition itself… Should Your Lordships hear such a petition at all is what I am asking,” Mr. Dave persisted.
The Chief Justice said Mr. Dave could argue on the point when the case comes up for final hearing.
Mr. Datar said the petition was influenced by the death of a girl in Tamil Nadu under suspicion that she was being forced to convert. The case was later transferred to the CBI.
The court gave time to the State governments which have enacted religious conversion laws to respond to a petition filed seeking transfer of various cases challenging these laws from the High Courts concerned to the Supreme Court for an authoritative ruling on their legality.
Attorney General’s stand
The court noted Attorney General R. Venkataramani’s objection to transferring these cases to the apex court. The Bench said it would hear the top law officer’s submission that the cases should continue to be heard in the respective High Courts.
The government has also opposed the locus of Citizens for Justice and Peace, an NGO associated with activist Teesta Setalvad, in approaching the apex court against these religious conversion laws.
The NGO, represented by senior advocate C.U. Singh, has argued that these State laws amount to undue interference in a person’s right of choice of faith and life partner.
The case concerns anti-conversion enactments of nine States, including Uttar Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Gujarat, Chhattisgarh, Haryana, Jharkhand and Karnataka.
Mr. Singh said each State’s law was used by the other as a “building block” to make a more “virulent” law for itself.
The religious conversion laws under challenge mandate a person proposing to convert or a priest who would preside over the ceremony to take prior permission from the local District Magistrate. Besides, the burden of proof was on the convert to prove that he or she was not forced or “allured” to change faith.
The petitions have argued that these State laws have a “chilling effect” on the right to profess and propagate one’s religion, enshrined in Article 25 of the Constitution.
The next date of hearing in the religious conversions case is March 17, 2023.
