The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a plea challenging the Chhattisgarh High Court order, which asked petitioners challenging hoardings put up by some gram sabhas barring the entry of Christian “pastors and priests” over fears of alleged forced religious conversion, to approach the statutory authority under the state Panchayat Upbandh (Anusuchit Kshetron par Vistar) Niyam or PESA Rules.
A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta noted that the Chhattisgarh High Court, in its October 28, 2025, judgement, granted liberty to the petitioners to approach the appropriate authority under the PESA Rules.
Appearing for the state, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said the plea before the High Court had limited prayers, but several new facts, documents, and dimensions have been brought up in the appeal.
Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves, representing the appellants, said, “A general cautionary hoarding intended to prevent illegal conversion activities cannot, per se, be termed unconstitutional.”
Mehta pointed out that it flowed from a constitution bench judgement of the SC, apparently referring to the 1977 decision in Rev Stainislaus vs State of Madhya Pradesh, in which the top court said that the expression “right to propagate religion” under Article 25 of the Constitution does not extend to converting another person through inducement, force, or fraudulent means.
Gonsalves argued that the HC had said many things about conversion without any material before it.
Justice Nath said that the petitioner should have approached the statutory authority under the Rules, which would have examined the matter based on the material.
Story continues below this ad
Arguments before Chhattisgarh HC
Before the HC, the petitioners contended that the hoardings were installed by respective Gram Sabhas exercising powers under the PESA framework.
They said that a circular issued by the director (Panchayat) on August 14, 2025, asked the chief executive officers of the Zila Panchayats of the districts where Panchayat (Extension to Schedule Area) Act, 1996, or PESA Act, is applicable, to “circulate a resolution/oath stating that the members of the Gram Sabha take oath to protect Jal, Jangal, Jameen (water, forest and land)”.
“The oath also includes to protect culture, folk songs, festivals and worshipping system and faith. Though the circular is dated 14.08.2025, even before this date, some members of the ruling party have instigated the tribal villagers to erect hoardings of this nature…to misuse the provisions of PESA Act to spread religious hatred against members of Christian community,” said the petitioners.
What Chhattisgarh HC said
The HC judgement also touched upon the issue of religious conversions. “Religious conversion has long been a sensitive issue in India’s socio-political landscape. Among the various forms of conversion, those allegedly carried out by Christian missionaries among poor and illiterate tribal and rural populations have generated particular controversy.”
Story continues below this ad
“While the Constitution guarantees every citizen the freedom to profess, practice, and propagate religion, the misuse of this liberty through coercion, inducement, or deception has become a matter of grave concern. The phenomenon of mass or motivated conversions not only disturbs social harmony but also challenges the cultural identity of indigenous communities.”
Narrating the history of missionary activity in the country, the HC said that it began with the establishment of schools, hospitals, and welfare institutions aimed at social uplift, literacy, and health care. “However, over time, some missionary groups began using these platforms as avenues for proselytisation”.
“Among economically and socially deprived sections, especially Scheduled Tribes and Scheduled Castes, this led to gradual religious conversion under the promise of better livelihoods, education, or equality. What was once seen as service became, in many cases, a subtle instrument of religious expansion.”
“The menace arises when conversion ceases to be a matter of personal faith and becomes a result of inducement, manipulation, or exploitation of vulnerability. In remote tribal belts, missionaries are often accused of targeting illiterate and impoverished families, offering them monetary aid, free education, medical care, or employment in exchange for conversion. Such practices distort the spirit of voluntary faith and amount to cultural coercion,” said the high court.
Story continues below this ad
“This process has also led to deep social divisions within tribal communities. Tribals converted to Christianity often adopt new cultural practices, distancing themselves from traditional rituals and communal festivals. As a result, villages become polarised, leading to tension, social boycotts, and sometimes even violent clashes.”
The judgement said that “for many tribal groups, religion is intertwined with their ancestral traditions and ecological worldview. Conversion disrupts this organic connection”. “The erosion of tribal faiths often results in the loss of indigenous languages, rituals, and customary laws. Moreover, newly converted individuals sometimes face rejection from their original community, creating social isolation and fragmentation,” said the high court.
“Religious conversion can also influence political representation. Since certain constitutional benefits, such as Scheduled Tribe or Scheduled Caste status, are linked with religion, conversion may alter demographic patterns and political equations, adding another layer of complexity,” said the HC.
The Chhattisgarh High Court said India’s secular fabric “thrives on coexistence and respect for diversity”. “Religious conversion, when voluntary and spiritual, is a legitimate exercise of conscience. However, when it becomes a calculated act of exploitation disguised as charity, it undermines both faith and freedom,” HC said.
Story continues below this ad
The so-called “conversion by inducement” by certain missionary groups is not merely a religious concern, it is a social menace that threatens the unity and cultural continuity of India’s indigenous communities”, said the high court.
“The remedy lies not in intolerance, but in ensuring that faith remains a matter of conviction, not compulsion,” the court added.
