What Happened
- The Maharashtra Legislative Assembly passed the Freedom of Religion Bill, 2026 by voice vote during the Budget Session, making Maharashtra the latest state to enact anti-conversion legislation.
- The Bill prohibits religious conversions carried out through coercion, fraud, inducement, or marriage, with Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis asserting it is "not against any community" but aims only at preventing unlawful conversions.
- Key penalties: conversions involving marriage attract 7 years imprisonment and ₹1 lakh fine; violations against minors, women, or SC/ST members attract 7 years and ₹5 lakh fine; mass conversions attract 7 years and ₹5 lakh fine; repeat offenders face 10 years and ₹5 lakh fine.
- The Bill was passed amid heated debate — the opposition Shiv Sena (UBT) extended support, while Congress MLAs raised concerns about potential vigilantism and impact on constitutional right to privacy; Samajwadi Party MLAs opposed it outright.
- The Bill will now be referred to the Maharashtra Legislative Council for passage before it can receive the Governor's assent and become law.
Static Topic Bridges
Articles 25–28: Right to Freedom of Religion
Articles 25 to 28 of the Constitution guarantee freedom of religion as a fundamental right under Part III. Article 25(1) gives every person — not just citizens — the freedom of conscience and the right to freely profess, practise, and propagate religion. This right is subject to public order, morality, health, and other Fundamental Rights. Article 26 guarantees collective religious freedom to religious denominations, while Articles 27 and 28 deal with taxation for religious purposes and religious instruction in state-aided institutions respectively.
- Article 25 is an individual right; Article 26 is a collective right vested in religious denominations.
- The right to propagate religion under Article 25 does not extend to converting others by force, fraud, or allurement — a distinction established by the Supreme Court.
- The right under Article 25 can be restricted by the State on grounds of public order, morality, and health, giving legislatures room to regulate conversions.
- Anti-conversion laws are enacted under Entry 1 (Public Order) of the Seventh Schedule's State List, affirming state legislative competence in this area.
Connection to this news: Maharashtra's Freedom of Religion Bill derives its constitutional legitimacy from this framework — the state's power to restrict forced conversions in the interest of public order is well-established, while debates around its scope touch on the limits of propagation rights under Article 25.
Rev. Stanislaus v. State of Madhya Pradesh (1977): The Foundational Precedent
In this landmark Supreme Court ruling, the Court upheld the constitutional validity of anti-conversion laws enacted by Madhya Pradesh and Odisha, settling the question of whether the right to "propagate" religion includes the right to convert others. The Court held that the word "propagate" in Article 25 means to transmit or spread religion by exposition of its tenets — it does not confer a right to convert another person, especially through force or fraud.
- Citation: Rev. Stanislaus v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Others, (1977) 1 SCC 677.
- The Court affirmed that state legislatures are competent to enact anti-conversion laws under Entry 1 (Public Order) of the State List.
- This judgment remains the foundational precedent for the constitutional validity of all state anti-conversion laws.
- More recently (October 2025), the Supreme Court raised concerns about the Uttar Pradesh anti-conversion law, describing certain provisions as "onerous," indicating continued judicial scrutiny of how these laws are drafted and implemented.
Connection to this news: The Maharashtra Bill's constitutionality rests squarely on the Stanislaus precedent. However, provisions linking conversion to marriage and potential for misuse noted by opposition members echo the Supreme Court's recent concerns about overreach in anti-conversion legislation.
Proliferation of State Anti-Conversion Laws in India
India has no central anti-conversion law, but over a dozen states have enacted their own legislation since Odisha became the first in 1967. The wave of such laws has intensified since 2017, with states like Uttar Pradesh (2020), Gujarat (2021), Madhya Pradesh (2021), Karnataka (2022), Haryana (2022), and Rajasthan (2025) all passing similar legislation. These laws share a common structure: prohibition of conversions by force, fraud, or allurement, with enhanced penalties for conversions involving vulnerable groups (minors, women, SC/ST communities).
- Odisha's Freedom of Religion Act, 1967 was the first state anti-conversion law in India.
- The UP Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Ordinance, 2020 (made permanent in 2021) introduced some of the most stringent provisions, including bail restrictions and district-level administration of conversion applications.
- Maharashtra's 2026 Bill fits within this national legislative trend, but its passage by a BJP-led state government with support from Shiv Sena (UBT) signals bipartisan consensus on certain provisions.
- The absence of a uniform central law means enforcement standards, definitions of "inducement," and procedural safeguards vary significantly across states.
Connection to this news: Maharashtra's Bill adds the country's most populous state to the list of those with anti-conversion legislation. The heated assembly debate reflects the broader national tension between state power to regulate religious conversions and individual freedoms of conscience and choice.
Key Facts & Data
- Maharashtra Freedom of Religion Bill, 2026 passed in the Legislative Assembly on March 16, 2026; referred to the Legislative Council for passage.
- Penalty for conversion via marriage: 7 years imprisonment + ₹1 lakh fine.
- Enhanced penalty for conversion of minors, women, or SC/ST persons: 7 years + ₹5 lakh fine.
- Penalty for mass conversions: 7 years + ₹5 lakh fine.
- Repeat offender penalty: 10 years + ₹5 lakh fine.
- Article 25(1) protects the right to "profess, practise, and propagate" religion — subject to public order, morality, and health.
- Rev. Stanislaus v. State of Madhya Pradesh (1977) 1 SCC 677: right to propagate does not include right to convert by force or fraud.
- At least 12 Indian states have enacted anti-conversion laws, starting with Odisha in 1967.
- Entry 1 of the State List (Seventh Schedule): "Public Order" — basis for state legislative competence on anti-conversion laws.