Read Time: 06 minutes

Supreme Court bench of Justice RF Nariman, Justice BR Gavai and Justice Hrishikesh Roy dismisses PIL seeking directions to the Union to control black magic, superstition and religious conversion by intimidating, luring through gifts and monetary benefits.

The Bench said that there is no reason why a person above 18, cannot choose the religion of his choice. Liberty has been sought to withdraw.

In the matter of Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India, petitioner approached the Top Court contending that “Religious conversion by carrot and stick and by hook or crook not only offends Articles 14, 21, 25, but also against the principles of secularism, which is integral part of basic structure of Constitution.”

Cause of Action, as per the petition, accrued on 10-05-1995, when Court directed to find out the feasibility of enacting Anti-Conversion Law but Centre did nothing to stop deceitful religious conversions. Reference in this respect is made to the Sarla Mudgal Case, (1995) 3 SCC6 635.

Reliance is further placed on Constitutional Commitments and Fundamental entitlements under Article 25, 46, 51A and the 1981 Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and Discrimination based on Religion or Belief, which expressly states, “No one shall be subject to coercion which would impair his freedom to have a religion or belief of his choice.”

“Several unethical predatory conversion strategies are commonly used. One method is material enticement in which humanitarian aid or economic, educational, medical or social assistance is offered on the condition that the person converts. Another is the denigration of the person's religion to make a new religion appear superior. A third unethical, a predatory method is the promotion of ‘bigotry’ i.e. knowingly and intentionally promoting religious hatred & violence. Predatory proselytization tears apart the fabric of the communities where it occurs and has led to the annihilation of cultures”, the petition further states.

Prayer sought;

1. Direct the Centre and States to take appropriate steps to control black magic, superstition and religious conversion by intimidating, threatening, deceivingly luring through gifts and monetary benefits.
2. Direct the Centre to ascertain the feasibility of appointing a Committee to enact a Conversion of Religion Act to check the abuse of religion in spirit of the direction in Sarla Mudgal Case.  
3. Alternately, direct the Law Commission of India to prepare a Report on Black Magic, Superstition and Religious Conversion within three months in spirit of the Judgment in Sarla Mudgal Case.
4. Alternatively, being custodian of the Constitution and protector of fundamental rights, the Court may use its plenary constitutional power to pass direction to stop conversion by carrot and the stick.
5. Pass such other direction(s) as this Hon’ble Court deems fit in facts and circumstances of the case and allow the cost to petitioner.

Case Title: Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India