The Moot Court Committee is proud to announce the 3rd Edition of the S.B. Prasad Memorial Moot Court Competition, scheduled to be held on 7th October 2025. This prestigious event is dedicated to the memory of Late Shri S.B. Prasad, a stalwart of the legal profession, known for his unwavering commitment to justice and his invaluable contributions to the Bar and Bench.
The competition has, over the years, earned a reputation for simulating high-calibre legal argumentation, attracting some of the brightest legal minds from across India. Law students from leading institutions are invited to participate and showcase their advocacy, research, and mooting skills before esteemed judges and legal professionals.
About the Moot Problem
This year’s moot proposition delves into pressing constitutional questions surrounding data privacy, state surveillance, and the fundamental rights of citizens in a digitally governed society. Participants will grapple with legal and ethical challenges posed by emerging technologies, testing their understanding of constitutional jurisprudence, public policy, and the doctrine of proportionality.
The case presents a live controversy, where a journalist’s refusal to enroll in a government-mandated Digital Identity scheme leads to sweeping consequences, raising issues under Articles 14, 19, and 21. Participants will argue both for and against the validity of this law before a simulated bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Indica.
What to Expect
- Date: 7th October 2025
- Venue: Virtual
- Format: Oral Rounds + Memorial Submission
- Judging Panel: Senior Advocates and Law Professors
- Awards: Best Team, Best Speaker, Best Memorial, Best Researcher
Why Participate?
✔️ Compete with some of India’s best legal talent
✔️ Receive feedback from experienced practitioners and jurists
✔️ Strengthen your legal reasoning and courtroom advocacy
✔️ Pay tribute to the values and vision of Shri S.B. Prasad
Registrations & Contact
Registrations are now open. Interested teams are encouraged to register early as slots are limited. Memorial submission guidelines, the moot problem, and rules of the competition are available in the official rulebook.
Moot Proposition
[1] The Republic of Indica is a sovereign, secular, and democratic country governed by a written Constitution that guarantees Fundamental Rights under Part III, including freedom of religion, privacy, and personal liberty.
[2] In March 2024, the State of Vindhya Pradesh enacted the Freedom of Religion and Regulated Conversion Act, 2024 (hereinafter “the Act”) in response to increasing reports of unlawful religious conversions allegedly induced through marriage, material allurement, or coercion.
[3] The Act mandates that any person intending to convert their religion must submit a declaration in prescribed form to the District Magistrate (DM) sixty days in advance. The DM shall initiate an inquiry into the intention, purpose, and voluntariness of the proposed conversion. Only after issuance of a No Objection Certificate (NOC) can the conversion ceremony take place.
[4] Section 8 of the Act declares any religious conversion performed without prior approval of the DM as void ab initio and a punishable offence.
[5] Section 12 of the Act places the burden of proof on the person performing, facilitating, or participating in a conversion to prove that it was done without force, fraud, or allurement.
[6] Section 14 prohibits mass conversions (defined as conversion of two or more persons at a time) unless organized with prior approval of the State Religious Harmony Board and oversight of the local administration.
[7] Ms. Iqra Ameen, an adult citizen of Indica aged 24 years and a postgraduate student, voluntarily converted from her religion to another on 21st August 2024 after a period of personal study and reflection. She did not inform the District Magistrate or obtain prior approval, believing that her decision was a private matter and a right protected under the Constitution.
[8] The conversion was conducted in a private ceremony attended only by family and a religious official. No inducement, coercion, or fraudulent activity occurred. However, an anonymous complaint was lodged against the religious facilitator under Sections 8 and 12 of the Act.
[9] Ms. Ameen was summoned by the police, and the religious official was arrested for facilitating an unlawful conversion without prior state permission. Ms. Ameen then filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Indica challenging the constitutionality of the Act.
[10] The Petitioner contends that Sections 3, 8, 12, and 14 of the Act are violative of her fundamental rights under Articles 14, 19, 21, and 25 of the Constitution. She argues that the requirement of state permission to change one’s religion infringes on individual dignity, decisional autonomy, and privacy, and that placing the burden of proof on private citizens reverses settled criminal law principles.
[11] The State of Vindhya Pradesh defends the legislation as a reasonable restriction on the freedom of religion under Article 25(1) in the interest of public order and communal harmony. The State argues that the Act is a preventive measure against mass illegal conversions and “love jihad” practices.
[12] The Union of Indica has filed a response supporting the Petitioner, arguing that while the State may regulate public order, the enforcement of blanket pre-approval processes for personal religious acts violates the basic structure of the Constitution.
[13] The Hon’ble Supreme Court of Indica has admitted the writ petition and framed the following issues for adjudication:
[14] Whether the provisions of the Vindhya Pradesh Freedom of Religion and Regulated Conversion Act, 2024, particularly Sections 3, 8, 12, and 14, are ultra vires the Constitution of Indica?
[15] Whether the requirement of prior approval from a District Magistrate to change one’s religion violates the rights to privacy, autonomy, and dignity guaranteed under Article 21?
[16] Whether placing the burden of proof on the person conducting or participating in a religious conversion is contrary to constitutional and criminal law principles?
[17] Whether the State’s interest in preventing unlawful conversions constitutes a reasonable restriction under Article 25(1)?
[18] All laws of the Republic of Indica are pari materia with the laws of the Republic of India. The matter is currently pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Indica.
[19] This proposition is purely fictional and any resemblance to real persons, laws, or events is purely coincidental. Participants may frame additional issues based on the facts.
📩 For queries and registration, contact:
📞 9734677631/6206262817
📧 admin@lawyernetwork.in
🌐 lawyernetwork.in