Current Affairs Topics Quiz Archive
International Relations Economics Polity & Governance Environment & Ecology Science & Technology Internal Security Geography Social Issues Art & Culture Modern History

Civil rights groups demand Maharashtra’s anti-conversion bill draft be made public

March 12, 2026 4 min read Polity & Governance Social Issues GS Paper 2 (Polity Governance Social Justice)
On This Page ▼

What Happened

  • Civil rights groups and activists demanded that the Maharashtra government make the draft of its proposed anti-conversion legislation public, objecting to a secretive drafting process that excluded public consultation
  • The Maharashtra Legislative Assembly subsequently passed the Freedom of Religion Bill, 2026 (by voice vote on March 17, 2026), introducing strict penalties for religious conversions carried out through coercion, fraud, inducement, or allurement
  • Activists noted that similar laws in other states (Uttarakhand, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh) are currently being challenged before the Supreme Court, questioning why Maharashtra is proceeding with new legislation in this legal climate
  • Under the Bill: conversions involving minors, women, persons of unsound mind, or SC/ST individuals attract 7 years' imprisonment and a fine of ₹5 lakh; conversions by any means of force/fraud attract 7 years and ₹1 lakh fine
  • The state government argued the Bill targets coercion, not religious choice, and is compatible with Article 25 of the Constitution

Static Topic Bridges

Article 25 — Right to Freedom of Religion

Article 25 of the Constitution guarantees to all persons (not merely citizens) the right to freely profess, practise, and propagate religion, subject to public order, morality, and health, and subject to other Fundamental Rights.

  • Article 25(1): Freedom of conscience and free profession, practice, and propagation of religion
  • Article 25(2): The state may regulate or restrict any economic, financial, political, or other secular activity associated with religious practice; it may also provide for social welfare and reform
  • The right to "propagate" religion (Article 25) does not include the right to convert another person through coercion or fraud — this distinction was settled by the Supreme Court in Rev Stainislaus v. State of Madhya Pradesh (1977)
  • Articles 25–28 together constitute the constitutional framework for religious freedom; Article 26 guarantees religious denominations the right to manage their own affairs
  • The Constituent Assembly debates show Dr B.R. Ambedkar explicitly declined to include a right to "convert" in Article 25

Connection to this news: The Maharashtra government's argument that the Bill only bans "coerced" conversion (not free conversion) tracks the Supreme Court's 1977 interpretation of Article 25 — but critics argue the Bill's broad definition of "allurement" and the prior-permission requirement go beyond what the Constitution permits.

History of State Anti-Conversion Laws in India

India has no central anti-conversion law. Several states have enacted their own Freedom of Religion Acts, beginning with Odisha in 1967. The constitutionality of these laws has been tested repeatedly in courts.

  • First anti-conversion law: Orissa Freedom of Religion Act, 1967
  • The Orissa High Court struck it down in 1973, but the Supreme Court in Rev Stainislaus v. State of Madhya Pradesh (1977) reversed this and upheld both the Orissa and Madhya Pradesh acts, ruling that the right to propagate religion does not include the right to convert
  • States with active anti-conversion laws (as of 2026): Odisha, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Jharkhand, and now Maharashtra
  • Uttar Pradesh's Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021 introduced "love jihad" provisions — penalising conversions through marriage — and is currently sub judice before the Supreme Court
  • A constitutional bench is reportedly examining whether state anti-conversion laws require parliamentary sanction under the Concurrent List (Entry 1: Public Order; Entry 97: residual powers)

Connection to this news: Maharashtra is the latest entrant in a growing list of states enacting Freedom of Religion Acts; the Supreme Court's pending examination of similar laws makes the timing of the Maharashtra Bill particularly contested.

Freedom of Religion vs. Secularism — Constitutional Architecture

India's Constitution is based on positive secularism — the state neither promotes nor disfavours any religion, but treats all equally. The Preamble (as amended in 1976 by the 42nd Amendment) explicitly declares India a "secular" state.

  • SR Bommai v. Union of India (1994): the Supreme Court declared secularism a basic feature of the Constitution that cannot be abrogated even by constitutional amendment (part of the basic structure doctrine from Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, 1973)
  • The Constituent Assembly rejected a clause that would have made proselytisation a fundamental right — indicating the framers intended space for regulation of conversions by coercion
  • Critics of anti-conversion laws argue that mandatory "prior permission" requirements from district authorities before a conversion can take place effectively grant the state veto power over a personal religious decision, violating Article 25
  • The National Commission for Minorities and NHRC have periodically flagged that anti-conversion laws are disproportionately used against religious minorities

Connection to this news: Civil society organisations are not merely demanding transparency — they are arguing that Maharashtra's Bill, like its counterparts, structurally conflicts with India's secular constitutional framework, and that the Supreme Court must rule definitively before more states legislate in this area.

Key Facts & Data

  • Maharashtra Freedom of Religion Bill, 2026: passed by Maharashtra Legislative Assembly, March 17, 2026
  • Penalty for conversion by force/fraud: 7 years imprisonment + ₹1 lakh fine
  • Penalty involving minors/women/SC/ST: 7 years + ₹5 lakh fine
  • Article 25: guarantees freedom of conscience and right to profess, practise, propagate religion (subject to public order, morality, health)
  • Rev Stainislaus v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 1977: Supreme Court upheld anti-conversion laws; ruled right to propagate does not include right to convert others
  • First anti-conversion law: Orissa Freedom of Religion Act, 1967
  • States with anti-conversion laws: at least 10 states as of 2026
  • "Secular" added to Preamble: 42nd Constitutional Amendment, 1976
  • SR Bommai v. Union of India, 1994: secularism declared a basic feature of the Constitution