Protracted litigation in the name of stopping forced conversions is consuming valuable time of the courts. The Supreme Court is hearing an alleged Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking action to stop fraudulent conversions in the country. Not wanting to be left behind, the Gujarat government is seeking to lift a moratorium on a provision of its anti-conversion law, which requires prior permission from a district magistrate for any conversion carried out “directly or indirectly”. The Gujarat High Court rightly struck down Section 5 of the Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act, 2003 (amended in 2021 to include ‘conversion by marriage’), while also staying the operation of other provisions , who sought to include inter-religious marriage as an example. Invalid conversion. The high court had noted that the requirement of prior permission would compel one to disclose one’s religious belief or any change of belief, contrary to Supreme Court rulings that held that marriage and faith involved a person’s choice. Is. In a strange claim, Gujarat argues that the prohibition on Section 5 is affecting genuine inter-religious marriages as well, which do not involve any fraud or coercion, as usually those who enter into such marriages are unable to do so. It is based on the claim that the requirement of prior permission obviates the need to question the true nature of conversion, if any, resulting from an inter-religious marriage.
No one will buy the claim that the provision enables voluntary conversion. Freedom of religion is protected only when no question is raised and no suspicion is raised merely on the basis of the fact that an inter-religious marriage has taken place. Common sense would suggest that forcing someone to disclose their intention to change their faith violates the right to freedom of conscience and privacy. Further, when a separate appeal against the interim orders of the High Court staying the provisions is pending before the Supreme Court, the requirement of prior permission of the State Government as part of the ongoing hearing on the PIL against religious conversion has been waived. There was no need for a petition seeking revival. , On the larger issue, the observation by a Supreme Court bench headed by Justice MR Shah that conversion through “greed” or charity work is a serious problem indicates the eagerness of the government to come up with anti-conversion measures. a national scale. It is questionable whether courts should consider exaggerated allegations of fraudulent conversions on a large scale across the country, instead leaving it to the states to identify the extent of the problem, and to protect religious freedom and communal harmony Take action.