SC Flags Concerns Over UP Anti-Conversion Law

Why in the News ?

The Supreme Court raised serious constitutional concerns over the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, observing that several provisions may violate the right to privacy, personal liberty, and religious freedom, while quashing multiple FIRs against university officials.

Supreme Court’s Observations on UP Law:

  • Judicial Concern: The Court noted that provisions of the UP Conversion Act, 2021 may fail constitutional tests of privacy, proportionality, and legality.
  • Sections 8 and 9: The Court flagged these sections—requiring pre- and post-conversion declarations—as onerous and intrusive.
  • State Overreach: Judges observed “conspicuous involvement of the state” in matters of personal faith and choice.
  • Police Inquiry Clause: Mandatory police investigation into personal conversion intentions was found to potentially violate personal liberty.
  • Pending Petitions: The apex court is also hearing broader challenges against anti-conversion laws in other states including Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, and Uttarakhand.

About SHUATS Conversion Allegations:

  • University Officials Cleared: The Court quashed FIRs against Sam Higginbottom University (SHUATS) officials accused of illegal conversions.
  • Faulty Complaints: It ruled that the complaints were legally defective as they were filed by non-competent authorities.
  • Motivated Actions: The bench observed that renewed investigations appeared to arise from vested interests.
  • Lack of Evidence: The material collected “failed to inspire confidence” in the genuineness of the allegations.
  • Legal Defect: FIRs were found to violate procedural safeguards under the statutory scheme in force at that time.

Constitutional and Judicial Context:

●      Article 25: Guarantees freedom of conscience and the right to profess, practice, and propagate religion, subject to public order and morality.

●      Privacy Jurisprudence: The KS Puttaswamy (2017) judgment recognized freedom of belief and choice as part of personal autonomy under Article 21.

●      Precedents: The Court cited Shakti Vahini (2018) and Shafin Jahan (2018), which protect individual choices in marriage and faith.

●      Secular Framework: The Constitution’s Preamble ensures liberty of thought, belief, faith, and worship, forming the foundation of secularism.

●      Cautionary Note: The Court warned that allowing third-party prosecutions could turn the law into a tool of harassment.