New Delhi, Dec 9 (UNI) The Supreme Court has issued notice on a writ petition filed by the Catholic Bishops Conference of India (CBCI) challenging the constitutional validity of several provisions of the Rajasthan Prohibition of Unlawful Religious Conversion Act, 2025.
The petition has been tagged with a batch of similar challenges already pending before the Court.
The Bench comprising Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice A.G. Masih passed the order after Solicitor General Tushar Mehta informed the Court that comparable challenges are pending against anti-conversion laws enacted by Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Gujarat, and Uttar Pradesh, all of which are pari materia in nature.
The Bench noted that writ petitions, M. Huzaifa & Anr. v. State of Rajasthan, Dashrath Kumar Hinunia v. State of Rajasthan, PUCL v. State of Rajasthan and Jaipur Catholic Welfare Society v. State of Rajasthan, are already pending before a Bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta.
Taking note of this, the Court directed that the CBCI petition be tagged with W.P.(C) 1047/2025, observing, “We are informed that similar enactments are under challenge in multiple writ petitions pending before this Court. The order passed in W.P.(C) 1126 is placed before our consideration. Tag it with W.P.(C) 1047.”
The petitions contend that several sections of the Rajasthan Act particularly Sections 5(6), 10(3), 12 and 13 violate fundamental rights and permit executive overreach: Section 5(6): Enables forfeiture of property where alleged unlawful conversion has occurred, after an inquiry by a gazetted officer.
Section 12: Mandates confiscation of premises linked to alleged illegal conversions by order of the District Magistrate. Section 13: Provides for demolition of constructions where illegal conversions are alleged to have taken place.
Section 10(3): Empowers the State to cancel registrations or licenses of institutions found in violation, freeze accounts, confiscate property, and impose a penalty of Rs 1 crore.
The petitions argue that these provisions allow “punitive demolitions” and “collective punishment”, violating Articles 14, 21, 22 and 300A of the Constitution by permitting forfeiture and demolition without judicial determination. They further assert that the law empowers administrative officials to exercise what are essentially judicial powers, undermining the rule of law and the doctrine of separation of powers.
The CBCI petition forms part of a wider set of challenges to anti-conversion legislations nationwide. The lead petition in the batch is by Citizens for Justice and Peace, questioning the constitutionality of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021. The Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind has also filed a separate challenge.
Earlier observations by the Supreme Court, while quashing FIRs against officials of SHUATS, Prayagraj, had flagged that certain provisions of the UP Act imposed an “onerous burden” on individuals wishing to change their faith.
A Bench had also remarked in 2024 that some parts of the UP law appeared to violate Article 25, which guarantees freedom of religion.
Similar PILs are pending against anti-conversion laws passed by Madhya Pradesh, Haryana, and Gujarat, among others.
With the latest tagging order, all challenges to the Rajasthan Act will now be placed before the same Bench hearing analogous matters from other states.
UNI SNG MI KK