Catholic Bishops Conference Of India Approaches Supreme Court Challenging Rajasthan Anti-Conversion Law

The Supreme Court yesterday(December 8) issued notice on a writ petition filed by the Catholic Bishops Conference of India challenging the constitutionality of the provisions of the Rajasthan Prohibition of Unlawful Religious Conversion Act, 2025.

The Court tagged the matter with other similar writ petitions.

It should be noted that notices have been issued in writ petitions M Huzaifa and Anr v State of Rajasthan & Ors [W.P.(C) No. 1047/2025], Dashrath Kumar Hinunia v. State of Rajasthan [W.P.(C) No. 1044/2025, Peoples Union for Civil Liberties v State of Rajasthan [W.P. (C) No. 1126/2025 and Jaipur Catholic Welfare Society v. State of Rajasthan [W.P.(C) No. 1108/2025] pending before a bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta informed the bench comprising Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice AG Masih that petitions are also pending challenging Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Gujarat and Uttar Pradesh anti-religious conversion Acts and they are pari materia. On the basis of these submissions, the Court ordered tagging of the present petition and that it be placed before one bench. 

It ordered: "We are informed that similar enactments are under challenge in multiple writ petitions pending before this Court. The order passed in writ petition(C) 1126 is placed before our consideration. Tag is with writ petition 1047."

These petitions challenge some of the key provisions, particularly Sections 5(6), 10(3), 12, and 13, contending that they enable executive authorities to confiscate and demolish private properties linked to cases of “unlawful religious conversion” even before any judicial determination of guilt.

Section 5(6) of the Act provides that property, where unlawful conversion of a person from one religion to another religion has taken place, shall be forfeited after upholding a due inquiry by any gazetted officer appointed by the District Magistrate or State Government. Section 12 says that every property or premises where illegal conversions have taken place shall be forfeited and confiscated by the District Magistrate or any other person appointed by the State Government, after holding an inquiry. Section 13 deals with the demolition of such illegal constructions where illegal religious conversions have taken place.

According to Section 10(3), if any institution or organization is found violating provisions of the Act, the State Government (or any other competent authority appointed by it) can cancel the registration or license of that institution or organization forever to carry out any activity within the state. Further, there can be confiscation of property of the institution or organization and freezing of their financial accounts. A penalty of Rs.1 crore shall also be imposed.

It has been argued that the impugned provisions amount to "punitive demolitions and collective punishment", violating fundamental rights under Articles 14, 21, 22, and 300A of the Constitution. It is further asserted that by empowering administrative officers to carry out demolitions and forfeitures without trial, the Act usurps judicial powers and undermines the rule of law and separation of powers.

Pending litigations

The main writ petition in the batch is filed by the Citizens for Justice and Peace, challenging the constitutionality of the UP anti-religious conversion Act. Followed by this, Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind also challenged the UP anti-conversion Act.

While hearing a matter, the Supreme Court bench in 2024 orally remarked that some parts of the UP anti-conversion law appeared to be violative of Article 25 of the Constitution, guaranteeing religious freedom.

Again this year, while quashing FIRs against the Vice Chancellor and other officials of the Sam Higginbottom University of Agriculture Technology and Science (SHUATS), Prayagraj, over alleged forced mass religious conversions of people to Christianity, it raised concerns over some provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021. The Court noted that the UP Act puts a very onerous burden on a person wanting to adopt a faith other than the one he professes.

Other PILs have been filed challenging the laws passed by the States of Madhya Pradesh, Haryana, Gujarat etc., regarding religious conversions.

Petition is also pending challenging an order passed by the Gujarat High Court, prima facie observing that the Gujarat Freedom of Religion(Amendment) Act, 2021, "interferes with the intricacies of marriage, including the right to the choice of an individual, thereby infringing Article 21 of the Constitution of India".

At the Gujarat High Court, a division bench comprising then Chief Justice Vikram Nath(now Supreme Court judge) and Justice Biren Vaishnav observed that the provisions of the law, commonly known as the 'love jihad' law, put parties who have validly entered into inter-faith marriage "in great jeopardy". An interim order was passed that the provisions of the Act will not apply to interfaith marriages which take place without force, allurement or fraudulent means.

Similarly, the Madhya Pradesh High Court in 2022 restrained the State Government from taking coercive action against any person who contravenes Section 10 of the Madhya Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act, 2021, which requires a person desiring to convert religion to give a declaration in this regard to the District Magistrate. It was observed that this provision is prima facie unconstitutional. 

Case Details: CATHOLIC BISHOPS CONFERENCE OF INDIA Vs THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN|W.P.(C) No. 1187/2025