They seem to have this weird logic, where if a country has some issues then its citizens can't talk about similar issues in other countries. Only seen this logic from BJP Indians. You never hear this kind of logic from any other country. It kind of speaks to how insecure and defensive about their own country.
-
Contact the PP Team
Indian state criminalises religious conversions by marriage
- Thread starter MenInG
- Start date
They seem to have this weird logic, where if a country has some issues then its citizens can't talk about similar issues in other countries. Only seen this logic from BJP Indians. You never hear this kind of logic from any other country. It kind of speaks to how insecure and defensive about their own country.
Stewie
Test Debutant
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2008
- Runs
- 15,367
Perhaps there should be laws around kidnapping and child marriages but lets not label them or present them as conversion laws. I think this is a total misinterpretation of the pressing matters at hand and a misrepresentation of the underlying issues.
In principle, I agree with you but I already posted a few posts ago that I can see this being a major issue because it is very subjective. If its a child, forced marriage, involves kidnapping, etc then it should be an open and shut case and "forced conversion" should be the least of your worries. However, if none of these other factors are involved and its a consenting union between two adults, which later falls apart, the person who converted can allege "forced conversion" to blackmail or just to get back at the spouse. So I can foresee a lot of such problems with this law. Knowing Indian government and courts, I can see how Muslims will be considered guilty till proven innocent and suffer the most from this.
Last edited:
https://freepressjournal.in/india/u...girls-convert-to-marry-hindu-boys-in-bareilly
Uttar Pradesh: Two Muslim girls convert to marry Hindu boys in Bareilly
After converting to Hinduism, Iram Zaidi became Swati and Shahnaz became Suman.
After converting to Hinduism, Iram Zaidi became Swati and Shahnaz became Suman.
Iram Zaidi married Adesh Kumar while Shahnaz married Ajay. Both these girls said that they have great faith in Hinduism.
"Women do not get respect in Muslim society. Whenever Muslim men want, they pronounce talaq thrice and then perform halala," they said.
The two girls were first 'purified' by the priest, then their names were changed and then the marriage took place. Both took the blessings of the priest after the wedding ceremony.
Hours after the wedding, Suman met the SSP Bareilly and said that she faced a threat to her life from her parents and brother who have kept a grave ready for her.
The police have assured full protection to the girls.
This law should be there to stop exactly cases like these. I at least hope that the Hindu boys did not use Muslim names to get close to those 2 Muslim girls.
Uttar Pradesh: Two Muslim girls convert to marry Hindu boys in Bareilly
After converting to Hinduism, Iram Zaidi became Swati and Shahnaz became Suman.
After converting to Hinduism, Iram Zaidi became Swati and Shahnaz became Suman.
Iram Zaidi married Adesh Kumar while Shahnaz married Ajay. Both these girls said that they have great faith in Hinduism.
"Women do not get respect in Muslim society. Whenever Muslim men want, they pronounce talaq thrice and then perform halala," they said.
The two girls were first 'purified' by the priest, then their names were changed and then the marriage took place. Both took the blessings of the priest after the wedding ceremony.
Hours after the wedding, Suman met the SSP Bareilly and said that she faced a threat to her life from her parents and brother who have kept a grave ready for her.
The police have assured full protection to the girls.
This law should be there to stop exactly cases like these. I at least hope that the Hindu boys did not use Muslim names to get close to those 2 Muslim girls.
cricketjoshila
ODI Captain
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2011
- Runs
- 46,174
- Post of the Week
- 1
So you don't have any answers, except abusing India. Thought so.
cricketjoshila
ODI Captain
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2011
- Runs
- 46,174
- Post of the Week
- 1
Our democracy means we decide how we govern ourselves, it is not open to suggestions from outsiders who have no stake in the country.
cricketjoshila
ODI Captain
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2011
- Runs
- 46,174
- Post of the Week
- 1
There are only Indians not BJP indians or congress indians or anything like that.
You may divide your country as per political party names, India has no such separate designation.
Why should i bother about what and how other countries work? I am the 5th largest economy in the world, one fifth of worlds population, a significant military and nuclear power, i have the right to decide how i will look after my interests and govern myself, without some foreigners telling me how i should work.
Maybe you look at India this way, but the words Bakht and Sanghi, and the fact that those words have been used a ton recently by Indians against other Indians recently suggests otherwise.
India is free to run the way it wants to. But when you run country certain way, people are free to question if it's actually a democracy and has religious freedom it claims to have.
"Freedom Of Religion, But...": Gujarat To Supreme Court On Conversion
New Delhi: The Gujarat government has told the Supreme Court that freedom of religion does not include the right to convert others, and requested the top court to vacate a High Court stay on the provision of a state law that mandates prior permission of the district magistrate for conversion through marriage.
The Gujarat High Court had through its orders dated August 19 and August 26, 2021 had stayed the operation of section 5 of the state government's Freedom of Religion Act of 2003.
In its affidavit submitted in response to a PIL by advocate Ashwini Upadhyay, the state government said it has filed an application seeking the HC stay be revoked so that the provisions to prohibit religious conversions in Gujarat by force, allurement, or fraudulent means be implemented. "It is submitted that the right to freedom of religion does not include a fundamental right to convert other people to a particular religion. The said right certainly does not include the right to convert an individual through fraud, deception, coercion, allurement or other such means," it said.
The state government said the meaning and purport of the word 'propagate' in Article 25 of the Constitution was debated in great detail in the constituent assembly, and its inclusion was passed only after the clarification that the fundamental right under Article 25 would not include the right to convert.
It said the constitutionality of Madhya Pradesh Dharma Swatantraya Adhiniyam, 1968 and the Orissa Freedom of Religion Act, 1967 which are pertinently pari materia (on the same subject) with Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act, 2003, was challenged before a Constitution Bench in 1977.
This Court had held that fraudulent or induced conversion impinges upon the right to freedom of conscience of an individual apart from hampering public order and, therefore, the State was well within its power to regulate/restrict the same.
"It is, therefore, submitted that the enactments like Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act, 2003, which seeks to control and curb the menace of organized, sophisticated large scale illegal conversions in the State of Gujarat have been upheld to be valid by this Court," the state government said.
It added that the High Court while passing the orders had failed to appreciate that by staying the operation of section 5 of the Act of 2003, the whole purpose of the Act effectively stands frustrated.
"It is humbly submitted that the Act of 2003 is a validly constituted legislation and more particularly the provision of section 5 of the Act of 2003, which is holding the field since last 18 years and thus, a valid provision of law so as to achieve the objective of the Act of 2003 and to maintain the public order within the State of Gujarat by protecting the cherished rights of vulnerable sections of the society including women and economically and socially backward classes," it said.
The state government said the appeal against the orders of the High Court also primarily pertains to the issue of religious conversions by force, allurement, or fraudulent means as is PIL filed by Upadhyay.
It said the High Court vide the impugned interim orders has stayed the operation of Section 5 of the Act of 2003, which is in fact "an enabling provision enabling a person" to get converted from one religion to another religion on his own volition.
It said, "At the same time, the exercise of taking prior permission also obviates the forcible conversion and protects the freedom of conscience guaranteed to all the citizens of the Country." It is submitted that the steps stipulated in Section 5 are the precautions to ensure the process of renouncing one religion and adopting another is genuine, voluntary and bona fide and free from any force, allurement and fraudulent means.
On November 14, the top court had said that forced religious conversion may pose a danger to national security and impinges on religious freedom of citizens.
It had asked the Centre to step in and make sincere efforts to tackle the "very serious" issue.
The court had warned a "very difficult situation" will emerge if proselytisation through deception, allurement and intimidation is not stopped.
"The issue with respect to the alleged conversion of religion, if it is found to be correct and true, is a very serious issue which may ultimately affect the security of the nation as well as the freedom of religion and conscience of the citizens.
"Therefore, it is better that the Union government may make their stand clear and file counter on what steps can be taken by Union and/or others to curb such forced conversion, maybe by force, allurement or fraudulent means," the top court had said in its order.
It had asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta to enumerate measures to curb the practice.
In his PIL, Upadhyay has sought direction to the Centre and states to take stringent steps to control fraudulent religious conversion by "intimidation, threatening, deceivingly luring through gifts and monetary benefits".
The top court had on September 23 sought responses from the Centre and others to the plea.
NDTV
New Delhi: The Gujarat government has told the Supreme Court that freedom of religion does not include the right to convert others, and requested the top court to vacate a High Court stay on the provision of a state law that mandates prior permission of the district magistrate for conversion through marriage.
The Gujarat High Court had through its orders dated August 19 and August 26, 2021 had stayed the operation of section 5 of the state government's Freedom of Religion Act of 2003.
In its affidavit submitted in response to a PIL by advocate Ashwini Upadhyay, the state government said it has filed an application seeking the HC stay be revoked so that the provisions to prohibit religious conversions in Gujarat by force, allurement, or fraudulent means be implemented. "It is submitted that the right to freedom of religion does not include a fundamental right to convert other people to a particular religion. The said right certainly does not include the right to convert an individual through fraud, deception, coercion, allurement or other such means," it said.
The state government said the meaning and purport of the word 'propagate' in Article 25 of the Constitution was debated in great detail in the constituent assembly, and its inclusion was passed only after the clarification that the fundamental right under Article 25 would not include the right to convert.
It said the constitutionality of Madhya Pradesh Dharma Swatantraya Adhiniyam, 1968 and the Orissa Freedom of Religion Act, 1967 which are pertinently pari materia (on the same subject) with Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act, 2003, was challenged before a Constitution Bench in 1977.
This Court had held that fraudulent or induced conversion impinges upon the right to freedom of conscience of an individual apart from hampering public order and, therefore, the State was well within its power to regulate/restrict the same.
"It is, therefore, submitted that the enactments like Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act, 2003, which seeks to control and curb the menace of organized, sophisticated large scale illegal conversions in the State of Gujarat have been upheld to be valid by this Court," the state government said.
It added that the High Court while passing the orders had failed to appreciate that by staying the operation of section 5 of the Act of 2003, the whole purpose of the Act effectively stands frustrated.
"It is humbly submitted that the Act of 2003 is a validly constituted legislation and more particularly the provision of section 5 of the Act of 2003, which is holding the field since last 18 years and thus, a valid provision of law so as to achieve the objective of the Act of 2003 and to maintain the public order within the State of Gujarat by protecting the cherished rights of vulnerable sections of the society including women and economically and socially backward classes," it said.
The state government said the appeal against the orders of the High Court also primarily pertains to the issue of religious conversions by force, allurement, or fraudulent means as is PIL filed by Upadhyay.
It said the High Court vide the impugned interim orders has stayed the operation of Section 5 of the Act of 2003, which is in fact "an enabling provision enabling a person" to get converted from one religion to another religion on his own volition.
It said, "At the same time, the exercise of taking prior permission also obviates the forcible conversion and protects the freedom of conscience guaranteed to all the citizens of the Country." It is submitted that the steps stipulated in Section 5 are the precautions to ensure the process of renouncing one religion and adopting another is genuine, voluntary and bona fide and free from any force, allurement and fraudulent means.
On November 14, the top court had said that forced religious conversion may pose a danger to national security and impinges on religious freedom of citizens.
It had asked the Centre to step in and make sincere efforts to tackle the "very serious" issue.
The court had warned a "very difficult situation" will emerge if proselytisation through deception, allurement and intimidation is not stopped.
"The issue with respect to the alleged conversion of religion, if it is found to be correct and true, is a very serious issue which may ultimately affect the security of the nation as well as the freedom of religion and conscience of the citizens.
"Therefore, it is better that the Union government may make their stand clear and file counter on what steps can be taken by Union and/or others to curb such forced conversion, maybe by force, allurement or fraudulent means," the top court had said in its order.
It had asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta to enumerate measures to curb the practice.
In his PIL, Upadhyay has sought direction to the Centre and states to take stringent steps to control fraudulent religious conversion by "intimidation, threatening, deceivingly luring through gifts and monetary benefits".
The top court had on September 23 sought responses from the Centre and others to the plea.
NDTV
Cpt. Rishwat
T20I Captain
- Joined
- May 8, 2010
- Runs
- 40,808
There was no abuse there. Please quote me and put it to the test.
Justcrazy
ATG
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2010
- Runs
- 106,141
It should be dealt under cheating section of IPC. India already has laws for that , instead linking it to marriage is not right.
Justcrazy
ATG
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2010
- Runs
- 106,141
There are many people who converted to Islam and Christianity from Hinduism because of caste issues . Also , most of the people who claim to be hindus , are just namesake , there are many hindus whom I know who never read any of there scriptures . This way it will die a natural death .
If you want to revive hinduism , instead of foccussing on Islam , and making false allegations on prophet of Islam , should work on grass root levels . Make translation of vedas common , and tell the modern hindus that we have scriptures and jurisprudence .
Justcrazy
ATG
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2010
- Runs
- 106,141
How will you prove that someone like Dharmender became a Muslim for marriage ? Is there a way we can prove or unprove something like this in court of Law.
Justcrazy
ATG
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2010
- Runs
- 106,141
It should be dealt with case of kidnapping.
cricketjoshila
ODI Captain
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2011
- Runs
- 46,174
- Post of the Week
- 1
If some disgruntled persons start calling others names, it doesn't mean that thats the opinion of the country.
Who are free to question? If any indian believes his rights have been infringed upon he can move the constitutional court.
Now if some foreigner believes this, well it has been said many times by various governments and courts in India, that rights enshrined in the constitution are for citizens, foreigners cannot question that.
Thats one part.
Since i want a constructive discussion, why dont you tell me which democratic right and religious right has been infringed upon?
cricketjoshila
ODI Captain
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2011
- Runs
- 46,174
- Post of the Week
- 1
No. If X marries Y and after marriage forces her to convert, thats what this law prevents.
Or
If someone forces someone to change religion else he/she will not marry him or her then the law comes in.
It has been stated in many court judgements that, conversion cannot happen by force or allurement or by blackmail.
cricketjoshila
ODI Captain
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2011
- Runs
- 46,174
- Post of the Week
- 1
If his spouse doesn't complain, the law has no affect.
Cpt. Rishwat
T20I Captain
- Joined
- May 8, 2010
- Runs
- 40,808
You prove it by putting Hindu judges in place to make the verdict.
"Against Constitution": Supreme Court On Forced Religious Conversions
New Delhi: Reaffirming that forced religious conversion is a "serious issue", the Supreme Court said on Monday it is against the Constitution.
The court was hearing a plea filed by advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay seeking direction to the Centre and states to take stringent steps to control fraudulent religious conversion by "intimidation, threatening, deceivingly luring through gifts and monetary benefits".
The Centre told the court it is collecting information from states on religious conversion through such means.
Appearing before a bench of Justices M R Shah and C T Ravikumar, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta sought time to furnish detailed information on the issue.
"We are gathering information from the states. Give us a week's time," Mr Mehta said.
He said statutory the regime will determine whether a person is converting due to some change in belief.
The top court acknowledged forced religious conversion is a very serious matter.
When a lawyer questioned the maintainability of the plea, the bench said, "Do not be so technical. We are here to find a solution. We are here for a cause. We are here to set things right. If the purpose of the charity is good then it is welcome but what is required to be considered is the intention."
"Do not take it as adversarial. It is a very serious issue. Ultimately it is against our Constitution. When everyone stays in India, they have to act per the culture of India," the bench observed.
The Supreme Court will now take up the matter on December 12.
Forced religious conversion may pose a danger to national security and impinge on religious freedom of citizens, the top court had said recently, and asked the Centre to step in and make sincere efforts to tackle the "very serious" issue.
NDTV
New Delhi: Reaffirming that forced religious conversion is a "serious issue", the Supreme Court said on Monday it is against the Constitution.
The court was hearing a plea filed by advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay seeking direction to the Centre and states to take stringent steps to control fraudulent religious conversion by "intimidation, threatening, deceivingly luring through gifts and monetary benefits".
The Centre told the court it is collecting information from states on religious conversion through such means.
Appearing before a bench of Justices M R Shah and C T Ravikumar, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta sought time to furnish detailed information on the issue.
"We are gathering information from the states. Give us a week's time," Mr Mehta said.
He said statutory the regime will determine whether a person is converting due to some change in belief.
The top court acknowledged forced religious conversion is a very serious matter.
When a lawyer questioned the maintainability of the plea, the bench said, "Do not be so technical. We are here to find a solution. We are here for a cause. We are here to set things right. If the purpose of the charity is good then it is welcome but what is required to be considered is the intention."
"Do not take it as adversarial. It is a very serious issue. Ultimately it is against our Constitution. When everyone stays in India, they have to act per the culture of India," the bench observed.
The Supreme Court will now take up the matter on December 12.
Forced religious conversion may pose a danger to national security and impinge on religious freedom of citizens, the top court had said recently, and asked the Centre to step in and make sincere efforts to tackle the "very serious" issue.
NDTV
After Himanta Sarma, Shivraj Chouhan Calls For Law Against "Love Jihad"
Bhopal: Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan today said the state will have a fresh law against "love jihad" if need be, citing the grisly murder of Shraddha Walkar by her boyfriend Aftaab Poonawala in Delhi that has shocked the nation. Speaking at an event meant to mark the martyrdom anniversary of tribal icon Tantiya Bhil, Mr Chouhan said the state will not allow anyone to "delude its daughters and chop them up into 35 pieces".
"Several people marry tribal women to purchase land in their names. This is not love. It is love jihad, I will not allow this game of 'love jihad' to continue in the state," Mr Chouhan said.
The term love-jihad has been coined by the right-wing to describe many inter-faith relationships. A section of the right wing contends that Muslim men deliberately lure Hindu women into relationships to ensure their religious conversion.
"Someone cheats our daughters in the name of love, marries them, and cuts them into 35 pieces. Such acts will not be allowed in Madhya Pradesh, The state government will bring stringent laws to prevent such acts. The land of tribals will be protected at all costs, These cheats have devised many such ways to grab tribal lands. They marry tribal women only to fight elections for the post of sarpanch. The state will make laws to curb this," he added.
Mr Chouhan is the second BJP Chief Minister to call for a strong law against "love jihad", citing the murder of Shraddha Walkar.
In a recent interview to NDTV, Mr Chouhan's Assam counterpart, Himanta Biswa Sarma, had said "love jihad" is a "reality" and the country needs a "strict law" against it.
"Love jihad is a reality from a national point of view," Mr Sarma had said. "There is evidence of love jihad (in the Walkar case)... even in Aaftab's polygraph test, it is said that he revealed that his actions will take him to jannat (heaven). There are reports on it," he had told NDTV.
BJP-ruled Madhya Pradesh already has an anti-conversion law, dubbed the "anti-love jihad law".
In 2021, the state government enacted a law which penalises religious conversions through fraudulent means. It provides for jail terms of up to 10 years and fines up to ₹ 1 lakh.
Mr Chouhan had declared that if someone "plots religious conversion or does anything like 'love jihad', you will be destroyed".
In February 2020, the Union Home Ministry had told parliament that the term "love jihad" is not defined under existing laws and no case has been reported by any Central agency -- officially distancing itself from term.
Asked about the matter, Himanta Biswa Sarma had said there is an effort now to find a legal definition for the term, "because we are convinced that love jihad exists even when you conduct a polygraph test".
NDTV
Bhopal: Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan today said the state will have a fresh law against "love jihad" if need be, citing the grisly murder of Shraddha Walkar by her boyfriend Aftaab Poonawala in Delhi that has shocked the nation. Speaking at an event meant to mark the martyrdom anniversary of tribal icon Tantiya Bhil, Mr Chouhan said the state will not allow anyone to "delude its daughters and chop them up into 35 pieces".
"Several people marry tribal women to purchase land in their names. This is not love. It is love jihad, I will not allow this game of 'love jihad' to continue in the state," Mr Chouhan said.
The term love-jihad has been coined by the right-wing to describe many inter-faith relationships. A section of the right wing contends that Muslim men deliberately lure Hindu women into relationships to ensure their religious conversion.
"Someone cheats our daughters in the name of love, marries them, and cuts them into 35 pieces. Such acts will not be allowed in Madhya Pradesh, The state government will bring stringent laws to prevent such acts. The land of tribals will be protected at all costs, These cheats have devised many such ways to grab tribal lands. They marry tribal women only to fight elections for the post of sarpanch. The state will make laws to curb this," he added.
Mr Chouhan is the second BJP Chief Minister to call for a strong law against "love jihad", citing the murder of Shraddha Walkar.
In a recent interview to NDTV, Mr Chouhan's Assam counterpart, Himanta Biswa Sarma, had said "love jihad" is a "reality" and the country needs a "strict law" against it.
"Love jihad is a reality from a national point of view," Mr Sarma had said. "There is evidence of love jihad (in the Walkar case)... even in Aaftab's polygraph test, it is said that he revealed that his actions will take him to jannat (heaven). There are reports on it," he had told NDTV.
BJP-ruled Madhya Pradesh already has an anti-conversion law, dubbed the "anti-love jihad law".
In 2021, the state government enacted a law which penalises religious conversions through fraudulent means. It provides for jail terms of up to 10 years and fines up to ₹ 1 lakh.
Mr Chouhan had declared that if someone "plots religious conversion or does anything like 'love jihad', you will be destroyed".
In February 2020, the Union Home Ministry had told parliament that the term "love jihad" is not defined under existing laws and no case has been reported by any Central agency -- officially distancing itself from term.
Asked about the matter, Himanta Biswa Sarma had said there is an effort now to find a legal definition for the term, "because we are convinced that love jihad exists even when you conduct a polygraph test".
NDTV
Justcrazy
ATG
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2010
- Runs
- 106,141
Conversuion cannot be made by force or allurement has been in IPC long time in some form .
In Islam also it is same.
My point is that first these kind of things are difficult to prove , secondly in case of kidnapping , that was the initial act of crime , marriage becomes secondary.
Justcrazy
ATG
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2010
- Runs
- 106,141
Even if spouse compaints , how can you determine what was his intention ?
cricketjoshila
ODI Captain
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2011
- Runs
- 46,174
- Post of the Week
- 1
Well that's why the law says conversion after or due to marriage will require certification from the district magistrate. This way no one can blame anyone.
Gharib Aadmi
First Class Star
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2018
- Runs
- 4,199
If a Hindu girl gives the 2 month notice that she is converting to marry her Muslim boyfriend will that be legal? The allurement argument seems vague. Will marriage be seen as a allurement? Will that be considered force conversion if her Muslim boyfriend refuses to marry her without conversion?
cricketjoshila
ODI Captain
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2011
- Runs
- 46,174
- Post of the Week
- 1
The law states that if you are going to convert for the purpose of marriage give information to the district magistrate and then after a prescribed time you can go ahead and convert.
It will be forced conversion if someone forces anyone to convert for marriage. Its blackmail. Convert or i will not marry.
If you go and read the constitution assembly debates, many members vehemently opposed allowing conversion. The reason given by Nehru was that, if someone is genuinely interested in finding his peace in another religion then the law should not be an hindrance. Ofcourse Nehru was hoodwinking the entire Constituent assembly.
Gharib Aadmi
First Class Star
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2018
- Runs
- 4,199
With draconian laws like this it would be better for Indian Muslims to marry using the special marriages act. They can do an unregistered nikkah later if they want.
Also Blackmail? This sounds dangerous. So if an Indian Muslim's Hindu girlfriend brings up marriage, and he says well I can only marry a Muslim send him to jail? Because he apparently did Blackmail?
What Supreme Court Said On "Allegations" In Religious Conversion Plea
A Supreme Court bench hearing a petition against forced religious conversions on Monday asked the petitioner's lawyer to consider moderating the averments made in the plea, after a senior advocate said "serious and vexatious" allegations have been made about followers of some religions that they were "perpetuating rape and murder".
A bench of Justices M R Shah and S Ravindra Bhat asked senior advocate Arvind P Datar, appearing for petitioner advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, to look into the issue.
"You please consider what is this allegation. You please consider this and moderate this," the bench observed orally.
The remarks came after senior advocate Dushyant Dave, appearing for one of the parties, sought to be impleaded in the case and said there are some very serious and vexatious allegations in Upadhyay's plea against certain religions.
"These allegations that certain religions are perpetuating rapes and murders, these averments should not be on your lordships' file. Your lordships should ask them to withdraw," Mr Dave said.
After the brief arguments, the top court noted that Solicitor General Tushar Mehta was not available and adjourned the hearing to January 9.
Asserting the purpose of charity should not be conversion, the top court had earlier reaffirmed that forced religious conversion is a "serious issue" and against the Constitution.
The court was hearing a plea filed by Upadhyay seeking direction to the Centre and states to take tough steps to control fraudulent religious conversion.
Forced religious conversion may pose a danger to national security and impinge on the religious freedom of citizens, the top court had said recently and asked the Centre to step in and make sincere efforts to tackle the "very serious" issue.
The court had warned a "very difficult situation" will emerge if proselytisation through deception, allurement and intimidation is not stopped.
Earlier, the Gujarat government had told the top court that freedom of religion does not include the right to convert others, and requested the top court to vacate a high court stay on the provision of a state law that mandates prior permission of the district magistrate for conversion through marriage.
The top court had on September 23 sought responses from the Centre and others to the plea.
Mr Upadhyay has submitted in his plea that forced religious conversion is a nationwide problem which needs to be tackled immediately. "The injury caused to the citizens is extremely large because there is not even one district which is free of religious conversion by 'hook and crook'," the plea submitted.
"Incidents are reported every week throughout the country where conversion is done by intimidating, threatening, deceivingly luring through gifts and monetary benefits and also by using black magic, superstition, miracles but Centre and States have not taken stringent steps to stop this menace," said the plea filed through advocate Ashwani Kumar Dubey.
The plea has also sought directions to the Law Commission of India to prepare a report as well as a Bill to control religious conversion by intimidation and through monetary benefits.
NDTV
A Supreme Court bench hearing a petition against forced religious conversions on Monday asked the petitioner's lawyer to consider moderating the averments made in the plea, after a senior advocate said "serious and vexatious" allegations have been made about followers of some religions that they were "perpetuating rape and murder".
A bench of Justices M R Shah and S Ravindra Bhat asked senior advocate Arvind P Datar, appearing for petitioner advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, to look into the issue.
"You please consider what is this allegation. You please consider this and moderate this," the bench observed orally.
The remarks came after senior advocate Dushyant Dave, appearing for one of the parties, sought to be impleaded in the case and said there are some very serious and vexatious allegations in Upadhyay's plea against certain religions.
"These allegations that certain religions are perpetuating rapes and murders, these averments should not be on your lordships' file. Your lordships should ask them to withdraw," Mr Dave said.
After the brief arguments, the top court noted that Solicitor General Tushar Mehta was not available and adjourned the hearing to January 9.
Asserting the purpose of charity should not be conversion, the top court had earlier reaffirmed that forced religious conversion is a "serious issue" and against the Constitution.
The court was hearing a plea filed by Upadhyay seeking direction to the Centre and states to take tough steps to control fraudulent religious conversion.
Forced religious conversion may pose a danger to national security and impinge on the religious freedom of citizens, the top court had said recently and asked the Centre to step in and make sincere efforts to tackle the "very serious" issue.
The court had warned a "very difficult situation" will emerge if proselytisation through deception, allurement and intimidation is not stopped.
Earlier, the Gujarat government had told the top court that freedom of religion does not include the right to convert others, and requested the top court to vacate a high court stay on the provision of a state law that mandates prior permission of the district magistrate for conversion through marriage.
The top court had on September 23 sought responses from the Centre and others to the plea.
Mr Upadhyay has submitted in his plea that forced religious conversion is a nationwide problem which needs to be tackled immediately. "The injury caused to the citizens is extremely large because there is not even one district which is free of religious conversion by 'hook and crook'," the plea submitted.
"Incidents are reported every week throughout the country where conversion is done by intimidating, threatening, deceivingly luring through gifts and monetary benefits and also by using black magic, superstition, miracles but Centre and States have not taken stringent steps to stop this menace," said the plea filed through advocate Ashwani Kumar Dubey.
The plea has also sought directions to the Law Commission of India to prepare a report as well as a Bill to control religious conversion by intimidation and through monetary benefits.
NDTV
Maharashtra Forms 13-Member Panel To Track Interfaith Marriages
The Maharashtra government on Thursday formed a 13-member coordination committee headed by a minister to track and maintain record of interfaith marriages, couples who have entered into such wedlocks in the state and also their families.
The "interfaith marriage-family coordination committee (state level)" will be headed by Maharashtra's Women and Child Development Minister Mangal Prabhat Lodha, said a Government Resolution (GR).
The GR, or government order, was issued by the Women and Child Development Department.
There are 13 members in the committee, including Mr Lodha, while the deputy commissioner in the women and child development department will be the member-secretary of the panel, it said.
A helpline number will also be made available for couples in interfaith marriages, said the GR.
The panel's scope includes taking stock of interfaith marriages that take place after elopement of couples or are performed at religious places or are registered or non-registered, said the order.
If required, counselling service will be made available to women who have entered into interfaith marriages, the government order said.
NDTV
The Maharashtra government on Thursday formed a 13-member coordination committee headed by a minister to track and maintain record of interfaith marriages, couples who have entered into such wedlocks in the state and also their families.
The "interfaith marriage-family coordination committee (state level)" will be headed by Maharashtra's Women and Child Development Minister Mangal Prabhat Lodha, said a Government Resolution (GR).
The GR, or government order, was issued by the Women and Child Development Department.
There are 13 members in the committee, including Mr Lodha, while the deputy commissioner in the women and child development department will be the member-secretary of the panel, it said.
A helpline number will also be made available for couples in interfaith marriages, said the GR.
The panel's scope includes taking stock of interfaith marriages that take place after elopement of couples or are performed at religious places or are registered or non-registered, said the order.
If required, counselling service will be made available to women who have entered into interfaith marriages, the government order said.
NDTV
Anti-Conversion Law: Supreme Court To Hear Appeal Against High Court Order
All conversions cannot be said to be illegal, the Supreme Court said today while agreeing to hear the Madhya Pradesh government's plea challenging a high court order restraining it from prosecuting interfaith couples who get married without informing the district magistrate.
A bench of Justices MR Shah and CT Ravikumar issued notice in the matter and posted the matter for hearing on February 7.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta sought a stay on the high court order but the Supreme Court refused to pass any direction.
Mr Mehta said marriage is used for illegal conversions and "we cannot turn a blind eye" to this.
The high court, in an interim order, had directed the state government not to prosecute under Section 10 of the MP Freedom of Religion Act (MPFRA) adults who solemnise their marriage on their own volition.
The high court on November 14 observed that Section 10, which makes it obligatory for a citizen desiring (religious) conversion to give a (prior) declaration in this regard to the district magistrate, is "in our opinion ex facie, unconstitutional in the teeth of aforesaid judgments of this court".
The MPFRA forbids conversions by misrepresentation, allurement, use of threat of force, undue influence, coercion, marriage or by any other fraudulent means.
The high court's interim direction came on a bunch of seven petitions challenging provisions of the MPFRA 2021. The petitioners sought interim relief to restrain the state from prosecuting anyone under the Act.
The court had granted the state government three weeks to file its para-wise reply to the petitions, and said the petitioners may file rejoinder within 21 days thereafter.
NDTV
All conversions cannot be said to be illegal, the Supreme Court said today while agreeing to hear the Madhya Pradesh government's plea challenging a high court order restraining it from prosecuting interfaith couples who get married without informing the district magistrate.
A bench of Justices MR Shah and CT Ravikumar issued notice in the matter and posted the matter for hearing on February 7.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta sought a stay on the high court order but the Supreme Court refused to pass any direction.
Mr Mehta said marriage is used for illegal conversions and "we cannot turn a blind eye" to this.
The high court, in an interim order, had directed the state government not to prosecute under Section 10 of the MP Freedom of Religion Act (MPFRA) adults who solemnise their marriage on their own volition.
The high court on November 14 observed that Section 10, which makes it obligatory for a citizen desiring (religious) conversion to give a (prior) declaration in this regard to the district magistrate, is "in our opinion ex facie, unconstitutional in the teeth of aforesaid judgments of this court".
The MPFRA forbids conversions by misrepresentation, allurement, use of threat of force, undue influence, coercion, marriage or by any other fraudulent means.
The high court's interim direction came on a bunch of seven petitions challenging provisions of the MPFRA 2021. The petitioners sought interim relief to restrain the state from prosecuting anyone under the Act.
The court had granted the state government three weeks to file its para-wise reply to the petitions, and said the petitioners may file rejoinder within 21 days thereafter.
NDTV
Religious Conversion Serious Issue, Don't Make It Political: Supreme Court
Observing that religious conversion is a serious issue that should not be given a political colour, the Supreme Court on Monday sought the assistance of Attorney General R Venkataramani on a plea seeking direction to the Centre and states to take stringent steps to control fraudulent religious conversions.
A bench of Justices M R Shah and C T Ravikumar asked Mr Venkataramani to appear in the matter in which the petitioner sought a check on religious conversions through "intimidation, threatening, deceivingly luring through gifts and monetary benefits", and assist as amicus curiae.
"We want your assistance also, AG. Religious conversions by force, allurement etc. There are ways and ways, anything by allurement, if that is happening, when what should be done? What are the corrective measures?" the bench said.
At the outset, senior advocate P Wilson, appearing for Tamil Nadu, called the petition a "politically motivated" PIL, insisting there was no question of such conversions in the state.
The bench took objection and remarked," You may have different reasons to be agitated like this. Don't convert court proceedings into other things. ... We are concerned for the entire state. If it is happening in your state, it is bad. If not, good. Do not see it as targeting one state. Do not make it political." The court was hearing a petition filed by advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay seeking direction to the Centre and states to take tough steps to control fraudulent religious conversions.
Forced religious conversion may pose a danger to national security and impinge on the religious freedom of citizens, the top court had said recently and asked the Centre to step in and make sincere efforts to tackle the "very serious" issue.
The court had warned a "very difficult situation" will emerge if proselytization through deception, allurement, and intimidation is not stopped.
The Gujarat government had told the top court at an earlier hearing that freedom of religion does not include the right to convert others, and requested it to vacate a high court stay on the provision of a state law that mandates prior permission of the district magistrate for conversion through marriage.
The Supreme Court had on September 23 sought responses from the Centre and others to the plea.
Upadhyay has submitted in his petition that forced religious conversion is a nationwide problem that needs to be tackled immediately. "The injury caused to the citizens is extremely large because there is not even one district which is free of religious conversion by 'hook and crook'," he claimed in the petition.
"Incidents are reported every week throughout the country where conversion is done by intimidating, threatening, deceivingly luring through gifts and monetary benefits and also by using black magic, superstition, miracles but Centre and States have not taken stringent steps to stop this menace," said the plea filed through advocate Ashwani Kumar Dubey.
The plea has also sought directions to the Law Commission of India to prepare a report as well as a Bill to control religious conversion by intimidation and through monetary benefits.
The matter will be heard next on February 7.
NDTV
Observing that religious conversion is a serious issue that should not be given a political colour, the Supreme Court on Monday sought the assistance of Attorney General R Venkataramani on a plea seeking direction to the Centre and states to take stringent steps to control fraudulent religious conversions.
A bench of Justices M R Shah and C T Ravikumar asked Mr Venkataramani to appear in the matter in which the petitioner sought a check on religious conversions through "intimidation, threatening, deceivingly luring through gifts and monetary benefits", and assist as amicus curiae.
"We want your assistance also, AG. Religious conversions by force, allurement etc. There are ways and ways, anything by allurement, if that is happening, when what should be done? What are the corrective measures?" the bench said.
At the outset, senior advocate P Wilson, appearing for Tamil Nadu, called the petition a "politically motivated" PIL, insisting there was no question of such conversions in the state.
The bench took objection and remarked," You may have different reasons to be agitated like this. Don't convert court proceedings into other things. ... We are concerned for the entire state. If it is happening in your state, it is bad. If not, good. Do not see it as targeting one state. Do not make it political." The court was hearing a petition filed by advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay seeking direction to the Centre and states to take tough steps to control fraudulent religious conversions.
Forced religious conversion may pose a danger to national security and impinge on the religious freedom of citizens, the top court had said recently and asked the Centre to step in and make sincere efforts to tackle the "very serious" issue.
The court had warned a "very difficult situation" will emerge if proselytization through deception, allurement, and intimidation is not stopped.
The Gujarat government had told the top court at an earlier hearing that freedom of religion does not include the right to convert others, and requested it to vacate a high court stay on the provision of a state law that mandates prior permission of the district magistrate for conversion through marriage.
The Supreme Court had on September 23 sought responses from the Centre and others to the plea.
Upadhyay has submitted in his petition that forced religious conversion is a nationwide problem that needs to be tackled immediately. "The injury caused to the citizens is extremely large because there is not even one district which is free of religious conversion by 'hook and crook'," he claimed in the petition.
"Incidents are reported every week throughout the country where conversion is done by intimidating, threatening, deceivingly luring through gifts and monetary benefits and also by using black magic, superstition, miracles but Centre and States have not taken stringent steps to stop this menace," said the plea filed through advocate Ashwani Kumar Dubey.
The plea has also sought directions to the Law Commission of India to prepare a report as well as a Bill to control religious conversion by intimidation and through monetary benefits.
The matter will be heard next on February 7.
NDTV
rickroll
Tape Ball Star
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2022
- Runs
- 600
Isn't religion a personal choice? How does the government have any constitutional basis to interfere in this personal choice? Or is this not enshrined in Indian constitution? Whatever happened to separation of church and state in a secular democracy? I have so many questions about how this is being allowed in India.
daytrader
ODI Debutant
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2015
- Runs
- 10,062
- Post of the Week
- 1
Similar threads
