The Supreme Court on Tuesday issued notices to multiple states on a batch of petitions seeking a stay on the anti-conversion laws enacted by them.

A bench of Chief Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice K. Vinod Chandran sought a response within four weeks from Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Haryana, Jharkhand and Karnataka on the pleas, posting the matter for further hearing after six weeks.

Counsels for petitioners, including the NGO Citizens for Justice and Peace and Jamiat-Ulema-i-Hind, on Tuesday urged the court to stay the impugned laws that were being used to target couples involved in inter-religious marriages.

Senior advocate Chandra Uday Singh, leading the arguments, told the bench that the Uttar Pradesh anti-conversion law imposed a 20-year jail term and stringent bail conditions. It also shifted the onus of proving their innocence to the accused instead of the prosecution, as is the norm in criminal law jurisprudence, he added.

Singh said that in the 2024 amendments carried out by the state government, third parties could file a complaint against people converting to other religions or getting into interfaith marriages. As a result, interfaith couples were being subjected to harassment by mobs as well, he said.

“Today, bail will become impossible for a person accused of an interfaith marriage. There is an urgency in the matter. Your Lordships may stay the legislation... several states have already enacted the law, some are in the process of enacting,” Singh told the bench, adding that the Rajasthan government, too, has recently implemented a law to ban religious conversions.

Senior advocate Indira Jaising, appearing for another petitioner, sought the continuance of the interim stay on the anti-conversion law enacted by the Madhya Pradesh government. Madhya Pradesh High Court had in 2023 stayed the anti-conversion law on the ground that it stipulated unreasonable conditions like two months’ notice to the district magistrate before their conversion. In January 2023, the top court had declined to vacate the stay imposed by the high court.

Senior counsel Vrinda Grover also sought a stay on the laws, particularly those enacted by the Uttar Pradesh and Haryana governments, on the ground that they were being increasingly used against interfaith couples.

Additional solicitor-general K.M. Natraj, appearing on behalf of the states, questioned the urgency displayed by the petitioners in seeking a stay on the anti-conversion laws when the issue related to religious conversions was pending before the top court since 2020.

The bench, however, de-tagged a separate PIL filed by advocate Ashwini Upadhyay seeking a pan-India ban on “deceitful religious conversions”.

The CJI asked Upadhyay: “Who will find whether it is a deceitful conversion or not?”