<p>The Supreme Court on Monday said charity and good work cannot be used for the purpose of conversion, while once again terming it as a "very serious" matter.</p>.<p>"The purpose of charity should not be conversion; every charity or good work is welcome; but what is required to be considered is the intention," a bench of Justices M R Shah and C T Ravikumar said.</p>.<p>Hearing a PIL filed by Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay for taking measures to check illegal conversion or those carried out by fraudulent means, the court said belief is something else but allurement of any kind for the purpose of conversion is "dangerous."</p>.<p>The top court also rejected a contention on maintainability of the plea on the ground that similar petitions by Upadhyay had earlier been not entertained.</p>.<p><strong>Also read: </strong><a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/national/north-and-central/muslim-husband-hindu-wife-booked-under-haryanas-anti-conversion-law-1168183.html"><strong>Muslim husband, Hindu wife booked under Haryana's anti-conversion law</strong></a></p>.<p>"We will not go into technicality. We are here to find a solution. Everybody has a right to chose one's religion but not through allurement," the bench said.</p>.<p>“Every charity, good work welcome, but purpose of charity cannot be conversion. If you believe that particular persons are to be helped, help them but it can't be for conversion but what is required to be considered is intention,” the bench said. </p>.<p>The bench further said allurement is very dangerous. It is a serious issue and it is against the basic structure of our Constitution. When everyone stays in India they are required to act as per culture and harmony of India, the court added.</p>.<p>The court fixed the matter for consideration on next Monday after Solicitor General Tushar Mehta requested for further time.</p>.<p>The court asked the Centre to file a detailed affidavit after obtaining information from States on anti conversion laws.</p>.<p>Senior advocate Arvind Datar appeared for Upadhyay. Senior advocates Sanjay Hegde and C U Singh represented the other sides.</p>.<p>During the hearing, Mehta submitted that there should be a neutral authority to decide on the issue of conversion. </p>.<p>The court on November 14 had asked the Centre to clarify its stand on steps taken to tackle the issue of forced religious conversion, saying it is a "very serious issue", and may affect the security of the nation and as well as freedom of citizens.</p>.<p>In its response, the Ministry of Home Affairs said it is cognisant of the gravity and the seriousness of the issue.</p>.<p>"It would be taken up in all seriousness by the Union of India and appropriate steps shall be taken as the central government is cognizant of the menace," it had asserted.</p>.<p>Asserting that the right to freedom of religion does not include a fundamental right to convert other people to a particular religion, the Centre had favoured the laws to check illegal conversion, saying those were necessary to protect "cherished rights of vulnerable sections of the society including women and economically and socially backward classes."</p>
<p>The Supreme Court on Monday said charity and good work cannot be used for the purpose of conversion, while once again terming it as a "very serious" matter.</p>.<p>"The purpose of charity should not be conversion; every charity or good work is welcome; but what is required to be considered is the intention," a bench of Justices M R Shah and C T Ravikumar said.</p>.<p>Hearing a PIL filed by Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay for taking measures to check illegal conversion or those carried out by fraudulent means, the court said belief is something else but allurement of any kind for the purpose of conversion is "dangerous."</p>.<p>The top court also rejected a contention on maintainability of the plea on the ground that similar petitions by Upadhyay had earlier been not entertained.</p>.<p><strong>Also read: </strong><a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/national/north-and-central/muslim-husband-hindu-wife-booked-under-haryanas-anti-conversion-law-1168183.html"><strong>Muslim husband, Hindu wife booked under Haryana's anti-conversion law</strong></a></p>.<p>"We will not go into technicality. We are here to find a solution. Everybody has a right to chose one's religion but not through allurement," the bench said.</p>.<p>“Every charity, good work welcome, but purpose of charity cannot be conversion. If you believe that particular persons are to be helped, help them but it can't be for conversion but what is required to be considered is intention,” the bench said. </p>.<p>The bench further said allurement is very dangerous. It is a serious issue and it is against the basic structure of our Constitution. When everyone stays in India they are required to act as per culture and harmony of India, the court added.</p>.<p>The court fixed the matter for consideration on next Monday after Solicitor General Tushar Mehta requested for further time.</p>.<p>The court asked the Centre to file a detailed affidavit after obtaining information from States on anti conversion laws.</p>.<p>Senior advocate Arvind Datar appeared for Upadhyay. Senior advocates Sanjay Hegde and C U Singh represented the other sides.</p>.<p>During the hearing, Mehta submitted that there should be a neutral authority to decide on the issue of conversion. </p>.<p>The court on November 14 had asked the Centre to clarify its stand on steps taken to tackle the issue of forced religious conversion, saying it is a "very serious issue", and may affect the security of the nation and as well as freedom of citizens.</p>.<p>In its response, the Ministry of Home Affairs said it is cognisant of the gravity and the seriousness of the issue.</p>.<p>"It would be taken up in all seriousness by the Union of India and appropriate steps shall be taken as the central government is cognizant of the menace," it had asserted.</p>.<p>Asserting that the right to freedom of religion does not include a fundamental right to convert other people to a particular religion, the Centre had favoured the laws to check illegal conversion, saying those were necessary to protect "cherished rights of vulnerable sections of the society including women and economically and socially backward classes."</p>
