<h3>Overview</h3> <p>On <strong>13 April 2026</strong>, the <span class="key-term" data-definition="Supreme Court — India's apex judicial body, final interpreter of the Constitution, and authority on constitutional matters (GS2: Polity)">Supreme Court</span> agreed to hear a petition challenging the constitutional validity of the <strong><span class="key-term" data-definition="Rajasthan Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2025 — State legislation aimed at preventing forced religious conversions, prescribing penalties for 'unlawful conversion' (GS2: Polity)">Rajasthan Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2025</span></strong>. The bench, comprising <strong><span class="key-term" data-definition="Chief Justice Surya Kant — The chief justice of the Supreme Court of India, responsible for constituting benches and overseeing the Court's administration (GS2: Polity)">Chief Justice Surya Kant</span></strong> and <strong><span class="key-term" data-definition="Justice Joymalya Bagchi — A sitting judge of the Supreme Court of India, part of the bench hearing the conversion law petition (GS2: Polity)">Justice Joymalya Bagchi</span></strong>, issued notices to the <span class="key-term" data-definition="Rajasthan Government — The executive authority of the state of Rajasthan, headed by the Chief Minister, responsible for implementing state legislation (GS2: Polity)">Rajasthan Government</span> and the <span class="key-term" data-definition="Centre — Refers to the Union Government of India, responsible for national legislation and policy (GS2: Polity)">Centre</span>, seeking their written responses.</p> <h3>Key Developments</h3> <ul> <li>The petition alleges that the <span class="key-term" data-definition="Rajasthan Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2025 — State legislation aimed at preventing forced religious conversions, prescribing penalties for 'unlawful conversion' (GS2: Polity)">Act</span> infringes fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution.</li> <li>The bench has set a timetable for filing affidavits, indicating a detailed judicial scrutiny of the law.</li> <li>Both the state and the Union have been asked to justify the necessity of the law in the context of federalism and personal law autonomy.</li> </ul> <h3>Important Facts</h3> <p>The legislation was enacted in 2025 following a series of high‑profile conversion controversies in Rajasthan. It defines <span class="key-term" data-definition="Unlawful conversion of religion — Conversion carried out through force, fraud, or inducement, prohibited under several state laws (GS2: Polity)">unlawful conversion of religion</span> and prescribes penalties, including imprisonment and fines, for those found guilty of inducing conversion by coercion or deceit.</p> <h3>UPSC Relevance</h3> <p>For aspirants, the case highlights several core topics: constitutional law (balance between fundamental rights and state legislation), federal structure (state’s power to legislate on personal matters versus Union competence), and the politics of religious conversion laws across India. Understanding the judicial reasoning will aid in answering GS2 questions on “Judicial Review” and “Centre‑State Relations”.</p> <h3>Way Forward</h3> <p>The <span class="key-term" data-definition="Supreme Court — India's apex judicial body, final interpreter of the Constitution, and authority on constitutional matters (GS2: Polity)">Supreme Court</span> will examine the petition, hear arguments from the state and Union, and eventually pronounce on the Act’s constitutionality. A striking down could set a precedent for other states with similar statutes, while upholding the law would reinforce the trend of state‑driven regulation of personal laws.</p>