The Supreme Court on Monday (December 8) issued notice on a writ petition filed by the Catholic Bishops Conference of India (CBCI), challenging the constitutional validity of certain provisions of the Rajasthan Prohibition of Unlawful Religious Conversion Act, 2025.
The Court has decided to list this petition along with other pending challenges against similar anti-conversion laws.
It was highlighted that notices have already been issued in multiple petitions including M Huzaifa and Anr. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. [W.P.(C) No. 1047/2025], Dashrath Kumar Hinunia v. State of Rajasthan [W.P.(C) No. 1044/2025], Peoples Union for Civil Liberties v. State of Rajasthan [W.P.(C) No. 1126/2025], and Jaipur Catholic Welfare Society v. State of Rajasthan [W.P.(C) No. 1108/2025], all pending before a bench led by Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta.
Appearing before a bench of Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice A.G. Masih, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta informed the Court that multiple petitions concerning similar legislations enacted by Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Gujarat, and Uttar Pradesh are already under consideration. Noting that these statutes share identical features, the Supreme Court directed the present matter to be tagged and heard together.
The order records:
“Similar enactments are under challenge before this Court in several writ petitions. The order in W.P.(C) 1126 has been placed before us. Tag with W.P.(C) 1047.”
Grounds of challenge
The petition assails provisions such as Sections 5(6), 10(3), 12, and 13 as unconstitutional. It is argued that these clauses empower executive authorities to seize and demolish private property allegedly linked to “unlawful conversion” without any judicial determination, violating:
• Articles 14 (equality before law)
• 21 (right to life and personal liberty)
• 22 (procedural safeguards in arrest/detention)
• 300A (right to property)
Key provisions questioned:
• Section 5(6) & Section 12: Allow forfeiture of premises where conversion is believed to have occurred upon inquiry conducted by government officers.
• Section 13: Permits demolition of structures allegedly used for illegal conversions.
• Section 10(3): Enables permanent cancellation of registrations/licenses of institutions, freezing of assets, confiscation of property, and fines up to ₹1 crore.
The petitioners argue that these provisions enable punitive demolitions and collective punishment, undermining rule of law and separation of powers.
Connected litigation
The lead matter in this cluster is filed by Citizens for Justice and Peace, contesting the constitutional validity of the UP Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021. Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind has also challenged the UP law.
The Supreme Court in 2024 had orally observed that certain provisions of the UP Act appear inconsistent with Article 25, which safeguards freedom of religion.
Recently, while quashing FIRs against officials of SHUATS University, Allahabad, the Court flagged concerns about the burdensome pre-conversion disclosures mandated under the UP Act.
Similar petitions remain pending against anti-conversion laws of Madhya Pradesh, Haryana, and Gujarat.
• The Gujarat High Court had prima facie held that the Gujarat Freedom of Religion (Amendment) Act, 2021 intrudes on the personal choice of marriage, violating Article 21.
• The Madhya Pradesh High Court, in 2022, stayed coercive action under Section 10 of the state’s Freedom of Religion Act, holding it prima facie unconstitutional.
Case Title: Catholic Bishops Conference of India v. State of Rajasthan
W.P.(C) No. 1187/2025
