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