The faces of grief like those of A Rayappan's family will continue to be repeated in the future for other converts who revert to their original religion from Islam if our political masters do not attempt to resolve this conflict through the constitution.

When the 1988 Constitution Amendment Bill was enacted in Parliament in March 1988,the government did not envisage that the enactment of Article 121(1A) would create injustice and bring grief to families like in the case M Moorthy and Rayappan.

It should be apparent by now that for this lacuna in the constitution to be satisfactorily resolved, there needs to be an amendment to article 121(1A) of the constitution.

Non-Muslims who convert and later decide to revert to their original faith cannot expect the government to step in every time such a crisis of religious identity appears.

For a quick and satisfactory resolution of similar incidents, the constitution must provide clear and unambiguous guidelines. If the relevant articles of the constitution are vague and ambiguous, then there must be an effort to amend the relevant part of the constitution in order to provide a clear path for an equitable resolution.

The affected and grieving family should not be forced to endure the uncertainty and tussle of the dead man's body while the religious authorities try to seek brownie points with their Syariah courts.