Supreme Court miffed at another frivolous petition alleging ‘fraudulent’ religious conversions

When the counsel for the petitioner wanted to know which forum they should approach against 'fraudulent' religious conversion if not the Supreme Court, the Bench retorted that it did not have "advisory" jurisdiction. 

—

ON Wednesday, the Supreme Court dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking directions to the Union government to take steps against "fraudulent" religious conversions.

The PIL also sought  directions for the Law Commission of India to prepare a Bill against religious conversions.

Expressing his displeasure at the trivial nature of the petition, the Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dr D.Y. Chandrachud remarked that filing of frivolous petitions through the PIL-route is becoming a serious problem.

The petitioner's lawyer, however, went on to submit that Hindus and minors were being targeted in such religious conversions.

She asked the court which forum should be approached with the plea, if not the Supreme Court.

The Bench which also comprised Justices J.B. Pardiwala and Manoj Misra retorted saying it did not have "advisory jurisdiction".

The petitioner sought to submit that a similar issue was pending before the court, but the Bench chose to dismiss the petition.

Earlier petitions on forceful conversions

In November last year, a Bench comprising Justices M.R. Shah and Hima Kohli directed the Union government to make its stand clear on a petition raising the issue of forced and deceitful religious conversion.

The Bench was hearing a petition filed by Bharatiya Janata Party leader and advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay.

The Bench had observed that the issue of forced religious conversion was a serious matter which affected national security as well as the freedom of conscience of an individual.

The observations of the Justice Shah-led Bench were in contrast to the observations made by a three-judge Bench headed by Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman (since retired) and comprising Justices B.R. Gavai and Hrishikesh Roy

On April 9, 2021 the three-judge Bench had refused to entertain a similar petition filed by Upadhyay.

Sensing the mood of the Bench, Upadhyay had chosen to withdraw his petition at that time.

Currently, a batch of petitions against 'wrongful' conversion and petitions challenging the anti-conversion laws enacted by various petitions are pending before a CJI-led Bench.

In February this year, the Supreme Court issued a notice on four writ petitions challenging the anti-conversion laws enacted by Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Jharkhand, Haryana and Karnataka.

Among other things the laws seek to prohibit religious conversion by marriage and make it mandatory to give notice of conversion to state authorities.