BREAKING| TCS Nashik Case: Plea In Supreme Court Seeks To Classify Forced Religious Conversion As ‘Terrorism’, ‘Waging War’

At the outset, the plea makes a stark assertion on demographics, stating that “Demography is Destiny. And, presently around 1,000 Girls are trapped under the garb of Love and converted everyday into foreign religion. Similarly, around 1500 families (particularly EWS, BPL SC, ST, OBC) are deceitfully converted everyday into foreign religion.”

It further claims that such practices amount to a structural threat to the nation’s constitutional fabric, arguing that “Organized Religious Conversion in Nasik has shaken the conscience of Citizens throughout the Country. Therefore, petitioner is filing this Application for Direction seeking certain directions and declarations to control Deceitful Religious Conversion, which is a serious threat to Sovereignty, Secularism, Democracy, Equality, Justice, Liberty, Fraternity, Unity and National integration.”

On constitutional interpretation, the petitioner contends that Article 25 does not protect conversions obtained through force or deceit. It states that “Right to freedom of religion does not carry the right to convert others through fraud, force, coercion, or cheating,” and argues that religious propagation cannot extend to coercive practices.

The application repeatedly stresses that religious freedom is subject to limitations, noting that the Constitution places Article 25 under “public order, morality, and health”. It further argues that the framers never intended unrestricted propagation, asserting that freedom of religion “cannot be practiced absolutely or freely”.

A substantial portion of the plea relies on judicial precedents, including Rev. Stainislaus v. State of M.P., to argue that propagation does not include conversion. It also cites High Court observations suggesting that unchecked conversions could disturb public order.

On the issue of legality and criminality, the petition escalates its argument by stating that such activities go beyond ordinary offences. It submits, “Conversion is an Act of Terrorism,” and claims that when conducted systematically, such acts satisfy ingredients under Section 113 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita relating to terrorist acts.

The plea further describes alleged conversion networks as “Organized Crime,” stating they involve “targeted identification of vulnerable groups… inducement, misrepresentation, coercion, and psychological pressure.” It also frames the issue in national security terms, asserting that such practices threaten sovereignty and internal stability, and calls for legislative intervention, including amendments to criminal law and establishment of special courts.

It seeks directions declaring deceitful religious conversion an "Act of Terrorism," "Indirect Waging of War," and a threat to national security. It also invokes UAPA and asks the court to direct the Centre and States to set up Special Courts for conversion cases, with sentences to run consecutively, not concurrently.

A key doctrinal argument in the petition draws a distinction between “Dharma” and “Religion”, stating that the Constitution should be read through a Dharmic framework. It argues that Dharma is inclusive and duty-based, whereas religion is “tradition-bound, text-anchored, community-specific, and structurally exclusionary.”

The plea concludes that coercive conversion undermines fraternity, democracy, and national unity, and seeks directions to the Centre and States to curb such practices more stringently. It also urges that sentences in such cases be made consecutive rather than concurrent, reflecting the seriousness attributed by the petitioner.

Notably, in 2023, the Justices MR Shah and CT Ravikumar had changed the case title of the PIL filed by Advocate Ashwini Upadhyay as "In Re : Issue of religious conversion".