The Supreme Court of India has dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking government intervention to prevent fraudulent religious conversions. The PIL, filed by Jermo Auto through lawyer Bharati Tyagi, had called for action against religious conversions conducted through intimidation, threats, deception, and enticing with gifts or money, stating that they violate constitutional rights such as Article 14 (right to equality), Article 21 (protection of life and personal liberty), and Article 25 (freedom to practice and propagate religion). However, the Supreme Court bench, comprising Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud, Justice J B Pardiwala, and Manoj Misra, declined to entertain the petition, emphasizing that unless there is concrete evidence of persecution, such cases do not fall under the court’s purview.

The court’s decision has sparked discussions about the use of PILs in India, with the bench expressing concern that PILs are increasingly being used as a tool for various issues. While the petitioner had urged the court to take measures against fraudulent conversions, the court highlighted its role as not advisory but rather focused on addressing live challenges and persecutions. This decision has brought attention to the broader debate on religious conversions and the legal mechanisms in place to address concerns related to them.