New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday sought responses from the Centre and 12 states on a fresh public interest litigation filed by the National Council of Churches in India (NCCI) challenging the constitutional validity of their respective anti-conversion laws.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi took note of the submissions made by senior advocate Meenakshi Arora, appearing for the NCCI, and issued notices to the Union government and the concerned states, directing them to file their responses within four weeks. The Christian body has also sought a stay on the operation of these state laws.
The Chief Justice ordered that the fresh pleas be tagged with similar petitions already pending before the court and said the matter would be heard by a three-judge bench. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, informed the bench that similar challenges to anti-conversion laws were already under consideration and that the Union government’s reply was ready and would be filed shortly.
Arora submitted that some states, including Odisha and Rajasthan, had enacted separate anti-conversion laws that were not part of the earlier challenges. She also pointed out that amendments to other existing Acts had not been questioned so far. The bench directed that copies of the petitions be served on the Advocate Generals of the respondent states and allowed the filing of a common counter affidavit within the stipulated time.
In its order, the bench noted the importance of the issue and directed that the matter be placed before a three-judge bench. During the hearing, counsel for the NCCI argued that certain state laws encourage vigilante action by incentivising complaints against alleged religious conversions, leading to a surge in cases. The Centre opposed this contention, maintaining that the validity of such laws is already covered by a five-judge Constitution Bench judgment.
Apart from the Union government, notices were issued to Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Odisha, Chhattisgarh, Arunachal Pradesh, Gujarat, Jharkhand, Uttarakhand, Haryana, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka and Himachal Pradesh.
The Supreme Court had earlier, on September 16, 2025, sought responses from several states on pending pleas challenging similar laws and had made it clear that it would consider requests for staying their operation after receiving replies. The court had also appointed advocate Shrishti as the nodal counsel for the petitioners and advocate Ruchira as the nodal counsel for the respondent states to streamline proceedings.
The issue of anti-conversion laws has been before the apex court for several years. In January 2021, it agreed to examine laws enacted by states such as Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand regulating religious conversions linked to interfaith marriages. The Uttar Pradesh law prescribes detailed procedures for all religious conversions, while the Uttarakhand law provides for a two-year jail term for conversions carried out through force or allurement.
Petitioners have consistently argued that such laws violate Articles 21 and 25 of the Constitution by infringing upon personal liberty and the freedom to profess, practise and propagate religion.
