New Delhi/ Bhubaneswar, February 2: On Monday, the Supreme Court directed the Centre and 12 states, including Odisha and Arunachal Pradesh, to respond to a fresh Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by the National Council of Churches in India (NCCI). The PIL challenges the validity of anti-conversion laws enacted by these states.
Represented by senior advocate Meenakshi Arora, the NCCI also sought a stay on the implementation of these laws. A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi took note of the NCCI's submissions and ordered the Centre and the concerned state governments to file their responses within four weeks.
The Court also decided to tag this new petition with ongoing cases involving similar issues. The Chief Justice mentioned that a three-judge bench would hear the cases together. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, informed the bench that similar petitions challenging these laws are already pending. "Our reply is ready and will be filed shortly," he said.
Meenakshi Arora highlighted that Odisha and Rajasthan have passed their own anti-conversion laws, which were not part of previous petitions. She further pointed out that amendments in other Acts also remain unchallenged and requested to serve all standing counsels in the case.
The bench directed that notices be issued, with copies to be served to the Advocate Generals of the concerned states. A counter-affidavit is to be filed within four weeks. "Given the importance of the issue, let it be placed before a three-judge bench," the bench added.
The Christian body's counsel argued that some state laws incentivize vigilante groups to lodge complaints against alleged conversions, leading to a surge in complaints. In response, the law officer for the Centre stated that these laws are in line with a five-judge bench judgment of the Supreme Court.
In addition to the Centre, notices were issued to the states of Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Odisha, Chhattisgarh, Arunachal Pradesh, Gujarat, Jharkhand, Uttarakhand, Haryana, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka, and Himachal Pradesh. On September 16, 2025, the Supreme Court had already sought the views of several states on similar petitions challenging the constitutionality of anti-conversion laws. The court had clarified that it would consider requests for staying these laws after receiving the responses.
The Court is hearing petitions that challenge the constitutional validity of anti-conversion laws enacted by various states. To streamline the communication process, the Court appointed advocate Shrishti as the nodal counsel for the petitioners and advocate Ruchira as the nodal counsel for the respondent states.
Previously, the Centre raised concerns regarding the standing of the NGO Citizens for Justice and Peace in challenging the anti-conversion laws, accusing the NGO of acting at the behest of political interests. The Union of India also alleged that the NGO had exploited the suffering of riot victims for financial gain. The Ministry of Home Affairs further claimed that the NGO allowed its name to be used for political agendas, thereby generating significant funds.
In January 2021, the Supreme Court agreed to examine new and controversial state laws regulating religious conversions, particularly in cases of interfaith marriages. The Uttar Pradesh law not only addresses interfaith marriages but also requires detailed procedures for religious conversions. The Uttarakhand law prescribes a two-year jail term for those found guilty of religious conversion through coercion or inducement, with inducements including cash, employment, or material benefits. The plea filed by the NGO argued that such laws violate Articles 21 and 25 of the Constitution by infringing upon personal liberty and the freedom to practice one's religion.
