'Arbitrary Legal Sanction To Pervasive State Intrusion Into Private Lives': NFIW Challenges Anti-Religious Conversion Laws Of Eight States In SC

The National Federation of Indian Women has moved the Supreme Court challenging eight state legislations regulating religious conversions, i.e. Anti-Conversion and Freedom of Religion Acts of various states.

Filed through AoR Aakarsh Kamra, the PIL challenges statutes enacted by the governments of Gujarat, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand.

It alleges that the statutes define the term “Allurement” in an overbroad manner, bringing within its sweep legitimate and natural aspirations that actuate/persuade individual decisions for the purpose of marriage.

It also objects to classification of women as a "vulnerable class" within these statutes. It says that such classification with separate (enhanced) punishment is unreasonable and has no rational nexus to any legitimate object.

It is contended that such classification has a disproportionate impact on women and their right to autonomy and provide "arbitrary legal sanction to pervasive State intrusion into the private lives and decisions of people, in a complete breach of the right to privacy and human dignity."

The plea says that the impugned laws deny the free exercise of the right under Article 25 of the Constitution and suffer from the vice of vagueness and overbreadth in defining penal offences which have a severe impact on personal liberty. It further alleges that these statutes have lead to "bullying, harassment and violence" against inter-faith couples at the instance of relatives or vigilante groups

It adds, "Insofar as they permit, legitimise and provide legal sanction to unwarranted interference, by family members or community vigilantes, into intimate and personal life choices, such as one’s choice of religion or marital partner, are constitutionally untenable and ought to be set aside."

It "is a result of a stereotypical notion that women are ‘weaker’ partners in a marriage, lacking in capacity and competence to make independent decisions. Such notions when reinforced by statutes promote gender stereotypes that are prejudicial...The impugned laws deny women agency by subjecting their marriage and/or conversion to legal scrutiny on the whim and fancy of her relatives and parents, even if the concerned adult woman has no complaint against the marriage and/or conversion."

Reliance is placed on Shakti Vahini v. Union of India where it was held that choice of an individual is an inextricable part of dignity.

Finally, the plea states that the impugned laws obstruct the "free flow of consciousness between religions", be it through voluntary conversions or inter faith marriages, are constitutionally unsustainable as they act as a barrier to the organic growth of the idea of fraternity. It thus prays that all the eight statutes be declared unconstitutional and void. "The criminalization of consensual conduct between adult individuals which does not cause any harm to others nor is contagious to society is unconstitutional, and to that extent the definition of allurement in the impugned Act is unsustainable in law and deserves to be struck down."

PIL is drafted by Advocates Soutik Banerjee, Devika Tulsiani and Mannat Tipnis; settled by: Advocate Vrinda Grover

Case Title: National Federation of Indian Women v. Union of India & Ors.