UP Conversion law| Supreme Court says provision to publicize personal details of converted person may require examination

The Supreme Court of India has observed that the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021 (the U.P. Conversion Act) pertaining to the pre and post-conversion declaration seem to introduce a very onerous procedure to be followed by an individual seeking to adopt a faith other than the one he professes.

"The involvement and interference of the State authorities in the conversion procedure is also conspicuous, with the District Magistrate having been legally obliged to direct a police enquiry in each case of intended religious conversion. Further, the statutory requirement of making public the personal details of each person who has converted to a different religion may require a deeper examination to ascertain if such a requirement fits well with the privacy regime pervading the constitution", a bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra has observed while it quashed the criminal proceedings initiated against the Vice Chancellor and other officials of the Sam Higginbottom University of Agriculture Technology and Science (SHUATS), Prayagraj, in relation to alleged forced mass religious conversion.

The bench clarified that the constitutional validity of the provisions of the U.P. Conversion Act did not fall for our consideration in the instant case, when it made the aforesaid observations.

Referring to Article 25 of the Constitution of India which lays down that all persons are equally entitled to have the freedom of conscience and shall have the right to profess, practise and propagate religion, which are subject to public order, morality and health and the other provisions of Part III of the Constitution, the bench added that the right conferred by Article 25 does not prevent the State from making any law, regulating or restricting any secular activity which may be associated with religious practice, providing for social welfare and reform.

Notably, the Supreme Court has also observed that the U.P. Conversion Act does not state organization of religious gatherings or doing charity work in the name of religion is not a criminal offence. "We do not find from a reading of the U.P. Conversion Act that organization of religious gatherings or doing charity work in the name of religion has also been made a criminal offence. No provision in the IPC prohibits such activities too", it has said.

Court has said that receiving foreign aid and carrying out charitable work, even in the name of religion, ipso facto is not a punishable offence under any of the legislations.

Petitions were filed before the Supreme Court by Vice Chancellor Rajendra Bihari Lal, Director Vinod Bihari Lal and other officials of the Sam Higginbottom University of Agriculture Technology and Science (SHUATS), accused in an illegal mass religious conversion case.

In December 2023, a vacation bench of the Supreme Court of India had stayed the Allahabad High Court's order directing the Vice Chancellor and other officials of the Sam Higginbottom University of Agriculture Technology and Science (SHUATS) to surrender before the court by December 20, 2023.

The FIR, filed in November 2023, alleged that the victim, a lower-middle-class woman, was lured into Christianity through gifts and clothing, with the accused, including the SHUATS VC, allegedly pressuring her to bring other women for conversion and illegal activities. The victim claimed she was also subjected to regular sexual exploitation.

The high court had noted that the victim, influenced by a higher priest, was manipulated into adopting Christianity for the promise of job security. Despite arguments by the accused that the victim fabricated the story in retaliation for her job termination in 2022, the court found the allegations serious and horrifying. Considering the gravity of the charges and the ongoing investigation, the court refused to interfere and ordered the Superintendent of Police, Hamirpur to supervise the investigation by three senior police officers. "No God or true Church or Temple or Mosque would approve such type of malpractices. If someone on his own, have chosen to get him converted to different religion is totally another aspect of the issue. In the instant case prevailing upon a tender mind of a young girl providing gifts, clothing and other physical amenities and then asked her to get her baptised is an unpardonable sin," the high court had ruled.

Case Title: RAJENDRA BIHARI LAL AND ANR. v. STATE OF U.P. AND ORS

Judgment Date: October 17, 2025

Bench: Justices Pardiwala and Misra