<p>New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to list for urgent hearing the pleas seeking a stay on anti-conversion laws enacted by various states, including <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/india/uttar-pradesh">Uttar Pradesh</a>, Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh.</p>.<p>A bench comprising Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justices K Vinod Chandran and NV Anjaria said the pleas will be listed for hearing in December.</p>.<p>A lawyer, appearing for one of the petitioners, sought listing of the interim pleas, seeking stay of the laws, next week.</p>.Delhi blast: CJI Gavai, Supreme Court judges express condolences, support for victims.<p>“It is not possible. I have to write judgments,” the CJI, who is retiring on November 23, said.</p>.<p>On September 16, the bench sought the stand of several states on the pleas seeking a stay on their respective anti-conversion laws.</p>.<p>While issuing notices to states, the CJI-led bench made it clear that it will consider the prayer for staying the operation of such laws once the replies were filed.</p>.<p>The bench had then granted four weeks to the states for their responses and allowed the petitioners to file rejoinders two weeks thereafter. The matter was posted after six weeks.</p>.<p>The bench is seized of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of anti-conversion laws enacted by several states, including Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Haryana, Jharkhand, and Karnataka.</p>.<p>The Centre previously raised questions over the locus standi of activist Teesta Setalwad's NGO Citizens for Justice and Peace in challenging the contentious state laws regulating religious conversions due to interfaith marriages.</p>.<p>Alleging the NGO allows its name to be used "at the behest of some selected political interest", the Union of India claimed it was guilty of collecting huge funds by exploiting the agonies of riot-affected people.</p>.<p>The apex court on January 6, 2021 agreed to examine certain new and controversial laws of states like Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand regulating religious conversions due to interfaith marriages.</p>.<p>The Uttar Pradesh law relates to not only interfaith marriages but all religious conversions and lays down elaborate procedures for anyone who wishes to convert to another religion.</p>.<p>The Uttarakhand law entails a two-year jail term for those found guilty of religious conversion through "force or allurement". The allurement can be in the form of cash, employment or material benefits.</p>.<p>The plea filed by the NGO alleged that these legislations violate Articles 21 and 25 of the Constitution as those empower the State to suppress an individual's personal liberty and freedom to practise the religion of his choice. </p>
<p>New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to list for urgent hearing the pleas seeking a stay on anti-conversion laws enacted by various states, including <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/india/uttar-pradesh">Uttar Pradesh</a>, Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh.</p>.<p>A bench comprising Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justices K Vinod Chandran and NV Anjaria said the pleas will be listed for hearing in December.</p>.<p>A lawyer, appearing for one of the petitioners, sought listing of the interim pleas, seeking stay of the laws, next week.</p>.Delhi blast: CJI Gavai, Supreme Court judges express condolences, support for victims.<p>“It is not possible. I have to write judgments,” the CJI, who is retiring on November 23, said.</p>.<p>On September 16, the bench sought the stand of several states on the pleas seeking a stay on their respective anti-conversion laws.</p>.<p>While issuing notices to states, the CJI-led bench made it clear that it will consider the prayer for staying the operation of such laws once the replies were filed.</p>.<p>The bench had then granted four weeks to the states for their responses and allowed the petitioners to file rejoinders two weeks thereafter. The matter was posted after six weeks.</p>.<p>The bench is seized of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of anti-conversion laws enacted by several states, including Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Haryana, Jharkhand, and Karnataka.</p>.<p>The Centre previously raised questions over the locus standi of activist Teesta Setalwad's NGO Citizens for Justice and Peace in challenging the contentious state laws regulating religious conversions due to interfaith marriages.</p>.<p>Alleging the NGO allows its name to be used "at the behest of some selected political interest", the Union of India claimed it was guilty of collecting huge funds by exploiting the agonies of riot-affected people.</p>.<p>The apex court on January 6, 2021 agreed to examine certain new and controversial laws of states like Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand regulating religious conversions due to interfaith marriages.</p>.<p>The Uttar Pradesh law relates to not only interfaith marriages but all religious conversions and lays down elaborate procedures for anyone who wishes to convert to another religion.</p>.<p>The Uttarakhand law entails a two-year jail term for those found guilty of religious conversion through "force or allurement". The allurement can be in the form of cash, employment or material benefits.</p>.<p>The plea filed by the NGO alleged that these legislations violate Articles 21 and 25 of the Constitution as those empower the State to suppress an individual's personal liberty and freedom to practise the religion of his choice. </p>