S. 8 UP Anti-Conversion Law | Representation To DM Can't Substitute Pre-Conversion Declaration In Schedule-I Format: Allahabad High Court

Sparsh Upadhyay

30 July 2026 7:50 AM IST

  • S. 8 UP Anti-Conversion Law | Representation To DM Cant Substitute Pre-Conversion Declaration In Schedule-I Format: Allahabad High Court
    Listen to this Article

    The Allahabad High Court has clarified that a person intending to convert his or her religion under the UP Anti-Conversion Law is mandatorily required to submit a pre-conversion declaration in the prescribed Schedule-I format under Section 8, and a mere representation to the District Magistrate (DM) cannot be substitute to it.

    A Bench of Justice Ajit Kumar and Justice Garima Prashad thus dismissed a writ petition filed by a woman who had sought a direction to the DM to consider her representation allegedly submitted under Section 8 of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021.

    However, the Court granted her liberty to file a fresh application in accordance with the statutory procedure.

    The petitioner claimed that she had moved a representation before the District Magistrate under Section 8 of the 2021 Act and sought a direction from the Court for its consideration.

    Upon examining the documents placed before it, the Bench found that the document relied upon by the petitioner was not an application in the prescribed format contemplated under the Act.

    The Court noted that Schedule-I prescribes the form in which a person seeking to convert from one religion to another is required to intimate the District Magistrate.

    Referring to Section 8, the Bench observed:

    "Section 8 of the Act of 2021 does not refer to the word representation rather it refers to an application for a party to show its intention to embrace a different religion and, therefore, the application is mandatorily required to be moved on a prescribed format under Schedule of the said Act”.

    In view of the above, the Court found no justification to issue a direction to the District Magistrate to decide the representation of the petitioner.

    The writ petition was thus dismissed. However, the petitioner was granted liberty to apply afresh before the District Magistrate under Section 8 of the Act of 2021, in the prescribed format provided under Schedule-I of the 2021 Act.

    Our readers may note that Section 8(1) of the 2021 Act provides that "one who desires to convert his/her religion, shall give a declaration in the form prescribed in Schedule-I at least sixty days in advance, to the District Magistrate or the Additional District Magistrate specially authorized by the District Magistrate, that he wishes to convert his/her religion on his/her own and with his/her free consent and without any force, coercion, undue influence or allurement"

    The prescribed Schedule-I requires the person intending to convert to furnish details including his or her name, parents' names, address, age, occupation, marital status, proposed place and date of conversion, and particulars of the religious priest who will perform the conversion ceremony.

    Upon receiving the declaration, Section 8(3) requires the District Magistrate to get an enquiry conducted through the police regarding the real intention, purpose and cause of the proposed religious conversion.

    Case Title - Divya Priyadarshini Singh @ Zainab Fatma vs State of U.P. and Another 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 491

    Case Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 491

    Click Here To Read/Download Order

    Sparsh Upadhyay

    Sparsh Upadhyay

    Sparsh Upadhyay is an Associate Editor with LiveLaw.

    Next Story