Supreme Court Refuses To Entertain PIL Seeking To Curb Deceitful Religious Conversions; Gives Liberty To Petitioner To Implead In Pending Matter

While doing so, a Bench of Justices MR Shah and CT Ravikumar allowed the petitioner to file an impleadment application in the pending matter before the Bench against forced religious conversions.

“Why should we hear you now?..... You file an application for impleadment. We’ll hear you. There will be a multiplicity of pleas otherwise", the Bench remarked today.

The bench is hearing another PIL filed by BJP leader Ashwini Upadhyaya on the same issue. While hearing that petition, the bench had remarked that forced conversion was a serious issue.

The petition filed by one Ashutosh Kumar Shukla further sought to declare the deceitful religious conversion by fraud or coercion or allurement by giving gifts/monetary benefits as a punishable offense as it is against Articles 14, 21, and 25 of the Constitution.

The plea also asked to direct the Centre to take stringent measures against such coercive religious conversions. And, to ask the Law Commission of India to prepare a report as well as a Bill to control religious conversion by intimidation, threatening, and deceivingly luring through gifts and monetary benefits.

It is the petitioner's case that under Article 25 guaranteeing the right to religion, the term 'to propagate' means to spread and publicize one's religious view for the edification of others. But the word propagation only indicates persuasion and exposition without any element of coercion. The right to propagate one's religion does not give a right to convert any person to one's religion, it was asserted.

The plea argues that underestimating others' religion may produce religious ill feelings and may lead to violence, which might disrupt public order and safety. Hence, it is the State's task to maintain a balance between the right to propagate religion and the right of the public to order and security of life.

"If propagation is done in any form to outrage the religious feelings of any section of the public, it is in violation of the religious freedom of that section of the society, which is protected under Article 25 of the Constitution."

The plea was filed through Advocate on Record Ashutosh Dubey.

Case Title: Ashutosh Kumar Shukla vs UOPI | WP (C) No. 1111/2022