Uttar Pradesh Anti Conversion Law

Uttar Pradesh Anti Conversion Law, Amendment, Future Implications

Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly passed the UP Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion (Amendment) Bill, 2024. Check here all about Uttar Pradesh Anti Conversion Law.

Table of Contents

Context: The Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly passed the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion (Amendment) Bill, 2024. The amendment makes the original 2021 anti-conversion law more stringent and susceptible to misuse.

Reasons for the Amendment

The Bill’s statement of reasons cited the need to make existing legislation “as stringent as possible.”
Alleged involvement of “foreign and anti-national elements” in demographic changes due to unlawful conversion was a key factor.
From January 1, 2021, to April 30, 2023, 427 cases were registered under the original Act.

Increased Penalties

Previous Penalties:
- Minimum prison term: 1 year.
- Maximum prison term: 5 years.
- Fine: ₹15,000.
New Penalties:
- Minimum prison term: 5 years.
- Maximum prison term: 10 years.
- Fine: ₹50,000.
Penalties for Converting Minors, Women, or Scheduled Castes/Tribes:
- Previous: 2-10 years in prison, ₹25,000 fine.
- New: 5-14 years in prison, ₹1 lakh fine.
New Offences:
- Securing “foreign” funds for unlawful conversion: 7-14 years in prison, ₹10 lakh fine.
- Causing fear of life or property, assault, force, or trafficking: Minimum 20 years in prison, up to life imprisonment.

Complaint Registration

Original Act:
- Only “any aggrieved person” or close relatives could file a complaint.
- Police reportedly allowed FIRs by right-wing activists and unauthorised third parties.
Amended Act:
- Allows “any person” to file an FIR related to any violation of the Act.

Bail Provisions

Introduces stringent “twin conditions of bail” similar to the Prevention of Money Laundering Act and Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.
All offences are cognisable and non-bailable, adjudicated by a sessions court or higher judicial forums.
Revised Section 7:
- Accused cannot be granted bail without the public prosecutor’s opportunity to contest.
- Bail may only be granted if the court believes the accused is not guilty and unlikely to reoffend.
- The reverse burden of proof makes obtaining bail difficult until trial completion.

Comparison with Other States

Other States with Anti-Conversion Laws:
- Odisha, Madhya Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh (long-standing laws).
- Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Uttarakhand (recent laws).
Notice Requirements:
- Madhya Pradesh: 60-day prior declaration to District Magistrate.
- Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand: 30-day prior notice.
- Uttar Pradesh: 60-day notice and police inquiry by the Magistrate.
Complaint Filing:
- Other States: FIRs can only be filed by the aggrieved individual or immediate family.
Bail Conditions: Other States do not impose “twin conditions of bail.”
Punishments:
- Other States: Sentences between 2 to 10 years.
- Uttar Pradesh: Includes life imprisonment.

Judicial Pronouncements on Conversion

Hadiya vs. Ashokan K.M: The Supreme Court held that an adult has the right to marry and convert to another religion of their choice, and the state cannot interfere with this right.
Lata Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh: The Supreme Court ruled that an individual has the right to marry someone of their choice regardless of their religion, caste, or social status, and any interference with this right is a violation of the right to freedom of choice.
Sarla Mudgal vs. Union of India: The Supreme Court held that a person can convert to another religion for the purpose of marriage, but the conversion should not be used as an excuse to evade legal obligations or responsibilities.
S. Pushpabai vs. C.T. Selvaraj: The Supreme Court ruled that an individual has the right to convert to another religion voluntarily, and any coercion or misrepresentation in connection with religious conversion is a violation of the right to freedom of religion.
Rev Stanislaus Vs Madhya Pradesh, 1977: The Supreme Court concluded that the right to propagate does not include the right to convert.

Future Implications

The constitutional validity of the amendment is likely to be challenged before the top court.
Existing petitions challenging the parent legislation and other anti-conversion laws are pending adjudication.
In May, a Bench remarked that certain provisions of the 2021 Act might contravene Article 25 of the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of religion.