. New Delhi: Raising questions on the state’s “involvement and interference” in conversion procedures under the UP Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act and terming it conspicuous, Supreme Court Friday quashed criminal proceedings under the law against the vice-chancellor and other officials of Sam Higginbottom University of Agriculture Technology and Science after finding infirmities in the probe.Without going into the validity of the UP law, which is pending in the apex court, a bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra touched upon the interplay of privacy, the right to freedom of free profession and practice of religion, and the role of govt authorities. It said an individual’s autonomy is supreme in the choice of faith and belief that are intrinsic in matters such as marriage and in which the court has prohibited the state as well as the law from controlling the choice of choosing a partner or even limiting or regulating the ability to decide on such matters. “The constitutional validity of provisions of the Act does not fall for our consideration in the instant case. Nonetheless, we can’t help but observe that the provisions of the Act pertaining to the pre-and post-conversion declaration seem to introduce a very onerous procedure to be followed by an individual seeking to adopt a faith other than the one he professes, the bench said.It said, “The involvement and interference of state authorities in the conversion procedure is also conspicuous, with the district magistrate having been legally obliged to direct a police enquiry in each case of intended religious conversion. Further, the statutory requirement of making public the personal details of each person who has converted to a different religion may require a deeper examination to ascertain if such a requirement fits well with the privacy regime pervading the Constitution.”The bench quashed the multiple FIRs filed in the case on various grounds, including that the UP law mandates that only an aggrieved person or their relative by blood, marriage or adoption can lodge an FIR with respect to acts of unlawful conversion and the case cannot be filed by a third party.This story had continued from a page 1 story in the newspaper. For your reading convenience we have added it below.Relief to SHUATS VC, SC junks action in conversion caseRaising questions on the state’s “involvement and interference” in conversion procedures under the UP Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act and terming it conspicuous, Supreme Court Friday quashed criminal proceedings under the law against the vice-chancellor and other officials of Sam Higginbottom University of Agriculture Technology and Science after finding infirmities in the probe.End of ArticleFollow Us On Social MediaVideosBelgian Court Clears Fugitive Jeweller Mehul Choksi’s Extradition To IndiaPortfolios Allocated To Gujarat’s New Ministers After Major Cabinet ReshufflePakistan Seeks Trump’s Intervention After Afghan-Taliban Forces Humiliate Pak Army In Border ClashDense Chhattisgarh Forests No Longer Safe For Naxals, Over 200 Maoists Lay Down ArmsChina Breaks Silence on Border Clash, Follows India To Tell Pakistan, Afghanistan to End CrisisPakistan-Afghanistan Border Tensions Explode Ahead Of Ceasefire Deadline: Blast Kills 7 Pak Soldiers‘Jungle Raj’: Amit Shah Slams RJD For Fielding Shahabuddin’s Son In Bihar ElectionsAir Power, Tech Will Define Future Wars: Defence Secretary Rajesh Singh at Tejas Mk1A Showcase EventHAL Celebrates Maiden Flight of the First Tejas Mk1A Fighter Jet Manufactured at its Nashik FacilityRahul Gandhi Meets Family of Lynched Dalit in UP, Claims Govt Threatened Them and Calls for Action123 Photostories Hindi parallel cinema gems that reshaped storytelling with power, purpose and heart7 types of rotis, their digestion time, and the right weather to eat6 essential skills you need to outsmart AI and stay ahead in the future of workMorning-after rescue: Natural remedies to recover from Diwali drinksDhanteras 2025: 5 minimal gold ring designs perfect for daily wear10 mind-blowing superpowers of chameleonsFrom Archana Puran Singh’s nostalgic Dehradun Diwali to fun housie nights with staff – Archana and Parmeet Sethi’s cherished family Diwali memories3 superfoods to control cholesterol and the right way to consume them6 ways to set healthy boundaries without pushing others awayFun facts about ‘Alpha’ star Sharvari Wagh123Hot PicksGold Silver PriceRiyadh AirBihar Election 2025Gold rate todaySilver rate todayPublic Holidays OctoberBank Holidays OctoberTop TrendingCardi BCarson WentzTrevon DiggsJustin HerbertStephen CurryJoel EmbiidLeBron JamesCarolina HurricanesLeon DraisaitlStephanie Lachances
New Delhi: Raising questions on the state’s “involvement and interference” in conversion procedures under the UP Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act and terming it conspicuous, Supreme Court Friday quashed criminal proceedings under the law against the vice-chancellor and other officials of Sam Higginbottom University of Agriculture Technology and Science after finding infirmities in the probe.Without going into the validity of the UP law, which is pending in the apex court, a bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra touched upon the interplay of privacy, the right to freedom of free profession and practice of religion, and the role of govt authorities. It said an individual’s autonomy is supreme in the choice of faith and belief that are intrinsic in matters such as marriage and in which the court has prohibited the state as well as the law from controlling the choice of choosing a partner or even limiting or regulating the ability to decide on such matters. “The constitutional validity of provisions of the Act does not fall for our consideration in the instant case. Nonetheless, we can’t help but observe that the provisions of the Act pertaining to the pre-and post-conversion declaration seem to introduce a very onerous procedure to be followed by an individual seeking to adopt a faith other than the one he professes, the bench said.It said, “The involvement and interference of state authorities in the conversion procedure is also conspicuous, with the district magistrate having been legally obliged to direct a police enquiry in each case of intended religious conversion. Further, the statutory requirement of making public the personal details of each person who has converted to a different religion may require a deeper examination to ascertain if such a requirement fits well with the privacy regime pervading the Constitution.”The bench quashed the multiple FIRs filed in the case on various grounds, including that the UP law mandates that only an aggrieved person or their relative by blood, marriage or adoption can lodge an FIR with respect to acts of unlawful conversion and the case cannot be filed by a third party.This story had continued from a page 1 story in the newspaper. For your reading convenience we have added it below.Relief to SHUATS VC, SC junks action in conversion caseRaising questions on the state’s “involvement and interference” in conversion procedures under the UP Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act and terming it conspicuous, Supreme Court Friday quashed criminal proceedings under the law against the vice-chancellor and other officials of Sam Higginbottom University of Agriculture Technology and Science after finding infirmities in the probe.
