Finalise Draft Rules Under Freedom Of Religion Act 1978 Within Six Months: Gauhati High Court To Arunachal Pradesh Govt
The Gauhati High Court on Monday asked the State of Arunachal Pradesh to finalise rules under Section 8 of Arunachal Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act, 1978 within six months. The division bench of Justice Kardak Ete and Justice Budi Habung sitting at Itanagar observed:“…we expect the concerned authorities to be mindful of their obligations and the draft rules would be finalized within a...
The Gauhati High Court on Monday asked the State of Arunachal Pradesh to finalise rules under Section 8 of Arunachal Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act, 1978 within six months.
The division bench of Justice Kardak Ete and Justice Budi Habung sitting at Itanagar observed:
“…we expect the concerned authorities to be mindful of their obligations and the draft rules would be finalized within a period of 6(six) months from today.”
The Court was hearing a PIL raising the issue that the State authorities have failed to frame the required rules as mandated under Section 8 of the Arunachal Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act, 1978 (The Act), even after lapse of 45 years of its enactment.
The objective of the said Act reads:
“An Act to provide for prohibition of conversion from one religious faith to any other religious faith by use of force or inducement or by fraudulent means and for matters connected therewith.”
Section 4 of the Act provides punishment of imprisonment to the extent of two years and fine up to ten thousand rupees to a person who converts or attempts to convert, either directly or otherwise, any person from one religious faith by the use of force or by inducement or by any fraudulent means or abets any such conversion.
Section 8 of the Act empowers the Government to make rules for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of the Act.
The State Government in its affidavit stated that Draft Rules has been submitted to the Government for further scrutiny and for obtaining vetting from the Law Department.
After considering the submissions of the Advocate General and perusing the affidavit and Draft Rules, the Court noted that no useful propose would be served by keeping the PIL pending as the framing of requisite rules as mandated under Section 8 of the Act is under process.
Thus, the Court closed the present PIL.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Gau) 72
Case Title: Tambo Tamin v. The State of AP & 2 Ors.
Case No.: PIL/16/2022