- 28 October, 2026
New Delhi, October 28, 2026: The Supreme Court has sought responses from the Union and Chhattisgarh governments on a petition challenging the constitutional validity of the state’s anti-conversion law, directing that the matter be heard alongside pending challenges to similar legislation in Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana issued notices to the two governments on Monday. The petition was filed by Isai Adivasi Mahasabha, an organisation representing tribal Christians.
The Chhattisgarh Assembly passed the law in March to prevent religious conversions carried out through force, inducement, fraud or misrepresentation. The legislation provides for life imprisonment in cases of mass conversion.
The law is the latest in a series of state-level anti-conversion legislations that civil rights groups have challenged, arguing that they infringe on individual rights and are intended to restrict interfaith marriages.
Court Considers Pending Challenge Before High Court
During the hearing, the bench noted that a similar challenge to the Chhattisgarh law was pending before the state’s High Court. It initially suggested that the petitioner pursue the matter there, observing that it would be preferable for the case to be heard expeditiously by the High Court rather than remain pending before the Supreme Court.
Senior advocate Colin Gonsalves, appearing for the petitioner, pointed out that similar laws enacted by other states were already being challenged before the Supreme Court. He argued that once those cases were decided, the proceedings before the High Court could become redundant.
The bench told Gonsalves that it could not compel petitioners who had approached the High Court to bring their cases before the Supreme Court.
Gonsalves informed the court that he was in touch with the petitioners who had filed the High Court case and that they believed the matter should have been brought before the Supreme Court. He agreed to consult them and consider filing a transfer petition to bring the proceedings before the apex court.
Petition Challenges Definition of ‘Allurement’
The petition contended that the original version of the Chhattisgarh law was limited to prohibiting conversions through force, fraud or allurement and did not restrict voluntary religious conversion.
Citing Article 25 of the Constitution, which guarantees religious freedom, the petitioner argued that the choice of religious belief represents an intimate expression of an individual’s personal autonomy and is a fundamental right.
The plea specifically challenged Section 2(l)(a) of the law, which classifies even a promise of a “better lifestyle” as allurement. It also questioned Section 2(l)(a)(vii), which treats the glorification of one religion over another as a prohibited inducement.
The petition argued that these provisions were broad enough to encompass ordinary religious preaching, the explanation of religious doctrine, and humanitarian or charitable activities that the Supreme Court had repeatedly held to be constitutionally protected.
It further questioned the exemption granted to the “reversion” of a person to an ancestral religion or faith, pointing out that the expression “ancestral religion” had not been defined in the legislation.
Mandatory Disclosure of Religious Conversion Questioned
The petitioner also challenged Section 4, which requires individuals intending to convert to declare their intention in advance. Under this provision, the person’s name, current faith and proposed religion must be published on the competent authority’s website and displayed on notice boards at the tahsildar’s office, gram panchayat and local police station.
Failure to comply with this requirement renders the conversion illegal.
The petition argued that the provision effectively transforms the exercise of a fundamental right into a licensed activity by requiring advance government notification and public disclosure at the neighbourhood level of a decision that it described as deeply personal.
The law also requires individuals to submit a fresh declaration within 30 days of conversion and appear in person within 21 days. Failure to fulfil these requirements means that no Certificate of Conversion will be issued and the conversion will be rendered illegal and void.
The legislation prescribes a minimum prison term of seven years. The punishment can extend to 10 years if the person converting is a minor, a woman or belongs to the Other Backward Classes, Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes.
Courtesy: Hindustan Times
© 2026 CATHOLIC CONNECT POWERED BY ATCONLINE LLP
