On Monday, November 14, 2022, a division bench of the Supreme Court comprised of Justices MR Shah and Hima Kohli observed that forcible conversion of religion will affect not only the Union of India but also individuals' freedom of religion and conscience.

"The issue with respect to alleged conversion of religion, if it is found to be correct and true, is a very serious issue which may ultimately affect the security of the nation as well as the freedom of religion and conscience of the citizens. Therefore, it is better that Union government may make their stand clear and file counter on what further steps can be taken by Union and/or others to curb such forced conversation maybe by force, allurement or fraudulent means."

The Bench was hearing a petition filed by Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, an advocate and BJP leader, asking the Union and state governments to take steps to prevent black magic, superstition, and coerced religious conversions.

During the hearing, the Bench noted that while there is religious freedom, there is no freedom for forced conversion.

Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Union, informed the bench that state legislation to this effect exists, particularly in Madhya Pradesh and Orissa.

According to the petition, incidents of forcible religious conversion using "carrot and stick," the use of black magic, and other such practices are reported every week across the country. Furthermore, the victims of such coercive conversions are frequently socially and economically disadvantaged people, particularly those from scheduled castes and tribes. This not only violates Articles 14, 21, and 25 of the Constitution, but it also violates the principles of secularism, which are an integral part of the Constitution's basic structure.

"It is necessary to state that Centre is empowered to make special provisions for the benefit of women and children under Article 15(3) and freedom of conscience, free profession, practice & propagation of religion under Article 25 is subject to public order, morality, health and other provisions of Part-III. Moreover, directive principles are affirmative instructions to the Centre to secure social, economic and political Justice; Liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship; Equality of status and opportunity and to promote among them fraternity, assuring the dignity of individual, unity, and integrity. But, Centre has not taken steps to secure high ideals outlined in Preamble and Part-III," 

Case Title: Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. UoI And Ors.

Citation: WP(C) No. 63/2022 PIL