On Thursday, April 17, the Supreme Court expressed its hesitation to transfer to itself multiple petitions currently pending in various High Courts that challenge state-level laws regulating religious conversions.
The matter came up before a bench comprising Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar, in connection with a transfer petition filed by the Jamiat Ulema-E-Hind Gujarat. The petition sought to consolidate and transfer to the Supreme Court all similar cases currently being heard by the High Courts of Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka, Jharkhand, Uttar Pradesh, and Himachal Pradesh.
Senior Advocate MR Shamsahd, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, informed the bench that approximately 21 such petitions are currently pending across these High Courts. He argued that given the overlapping legal and constitutional issues involved—such as the right to freedom of religion, the scope of anti-conversion laws, and concerns about misuse of such legislation—a consolidated hearing by the apex court would ensure uniformity and avoid conflicting judgments.
However, the Supreme Court bench appeared disinclined to accept the request at this stage. While not passing any conclusive order on the transfer plea, the bench indicated that the High Courts were fully competent to adjudicate these matters independently. The Court suggested that it would wait to see how the High Courts proceed before considering whether central intervention by the Supreme Court is warranted.
While the CJI scheduled the matter for consideration in the week beginning July 21, he also remarked that it may not be appropriate to transfer the petitions directly to the Supreme Court, given that the laws in question have been enacted by different states. He pointed out that these laws may vary in language and content, making central adjudication complex. He explained: "There are a lot of consequences; languages of the sections are different, and handling them all in the Supreme Court may be very difficult."
"Different enactments, different languages, different provisions would be challenged. And it is not a central enactment, it's a state enactment ....then it will be called here?" CJI asked.
The petitioner responded by noting that the Supreme Court is already handling writ petitions challenging similar laws. The primary case before the Court has been filed by the human rights organization Citizens for Justice and Peace, which contests the constitutionality of several state laws that criminalize unlawful religious conversions.
Subsequently, Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind approached the Supreme Court with a transfer petition, seeking to consolidate and move 21 related cases—currently pending in six different High Courts—to the apex court. Notably, the High Courts of Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh have issued interim orders staying certain provisions of their respective anti-conversion laws. These interim stays have been challenged by the respective state governments before the Supreme Court.
info@adhwaitha.com
