The Maharashtra Freedom of Religion Act, 2026, regulates religious conversions in the state. The law covers conversions alleged to have been obtained through force, fraud, coercion, misrepresentation, undue influence, allurement, inducement, deception connected with marriage or other unlawful means. It also sets out a procedure for people who voluntarily choose to change their religion.
The debate around the law has included questions about ‘Love Jihad’, interfaith relationships, religious freedom, privacy, personal choice and the role of the government in regulating conversions.
Timeline
1967: Odisha becomes the first state after Independence to enact an anti-conversion law through the Orissa Freedom of Religion Act, 1967.
1968: Madhya Pradesh follows with its legislation.
Subsequent years: Several other states enact similar laws, with differences in their definitions, procedures and penalties.
March 2026: The BJP-led Mahayuti government passes the Maharashtra Freedom of Religion Act, 2026, in the Maharashtra Legislature.
August 5, 2026: Pune City Police register what is reported as the first case under the newly enforced law. The accused is a 22-year-old man from Uttar Pradesh who is alleged to have pressured his minor partner to convert to his religion.
What led to the demand for such a law in Maharashtra?
Leaders of the ruling BJP pushed for legislation aimed at preventing what they described as forced, fraudulent and coercive religious conversions.Minister Mangal Prabhat Lodha had earlier claimed that his department had received more than one lakh complaints related to ‘Love Jihad’.
Did the department’s committee find complaints of forced conversion?
According to information obtained under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, the department’s concerned committee reportedly found no such complaints of forced religious conversion.
What is ‘Love Jihad’ in this debate?
‘Love Jihad’ is the expression used to refer to alleged cases in which relationships are said to be linked to religious conversion.
The expression does not appear as a legal offence in the Maharashtra Freedom of Religion Act, 2026.
The Act instead deals with specified forms of unlawful conversion, including conversion through force, fraud, coercion, misrepresentation, undue influence, inducement, deception connected with marriage or other unlawful means.
Why was legislation also linked to interfaith relationships?
The proposed law became part of a wider discussion about religious conversion and relationships between people of different religions.
Opposition parties and civil-society groups raised concerns that the legislation could affect an individual’s constitutional freedom to choose their religion and life partner.They particularly raised concerns about interfaith couples and minority communities.
Which states have anti-conversion laws?
Maharashtra has joined several states that have enacted laws commonly described as anti-conversion or Freedom of Religion laws.
They include:Arunachal Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand.
Which state was the first to enact such a law?
Odisha was the first Indian state after Independence to enact such legislation.It passed the Orissa Freedom of Religion Act, 1967.
What is the Maharashtra Freedom of Religion Act, 2026?
The Act regulates religious conversions in Maharashtra.It makes unlawful conversion an offence when it is brought about through:Force or threat, fraud, misrepresentation, coercion, undue influence, allurement or inducement, deception, including deception connected with marriage, and other unlawful means. The Act also lays down a procedure for people who voluntarily choose to change their religion.
Does the law prohibit voluntary religious conversion?
The government’s stated position is that it does not prohibit voluntary religious conversion.It also states that the law does not prohibit genuine interfaith relationships.
What concerns have the ruling party leaders raised about tribal communities?
They claim alleged conversions among tribal communities, particularly through inducements or allurement.Some have argued that unchecked conversion could eventually alter the demographic balance of Hindu-majority communities.
What did Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis say about the proposed law?
Fadnavis maintained that the government would study laws enacted in other states and introduce legislation considered appropriate for Maharashtra.
Why did opposition parties object to the legislation?
Opposition parties and civil-society groups argued that the proposed legislation could interfere with the constitutional freedom to choose one’s religion and life partner.They described the proposed law as coercive and potentially discriminatory, particularly in cases involving interfaith couples and minority communities.
What is the larger debate around the law?
The government says individuals, particularly vulnerable people, must be protected from religious conversion achieved through force, fraud, coercion or inducement.
Opposition parties and civil-society groups argue that such protection should not come at the cost of an individual’s constitutional freedom to choose their religion, partner and personal way of life.
What is the concern about freedom of choice?
Critics argue that a law intended to protect freedom of religion could, in some circumstances, restrict an individual’s freedom to choose their religion.
They do not necessarily dispute the need to prevent coercion.Their concern is about the breadth of the provisions and how they may be interpreted and enforced.
Why is distinguishing coercion from a voluntary decision important?
Critics argue that religious choices can sometimes be influenced by personal relationships, social circumstances, family support or individual experiences.
They say the difficulty is in distinguishing genuine coercion from a voluntary personal decision.
What is the concern about government oversight?
Critics object to provisions requiring advance notice to government authorities before a person changes religion.
They argue that such requirements can turn a personal decision about faith and conscience into an administrative process.
They say freedom of conscience should allow individuals to adopt, reject or change their religious beliefs without unnecessary government interference.
What are the privacy concerns?
Opponents argue that the legislation could bring matters involving religion, relationships and personal choice under greater state scrutiny.
They say constitutional protections relating to privacy, dignity and personal liberty require the State to respect an adult’s ability to make fundamental personal decisions.
How could the law affect interfaith relationships?
Interfaith relationships are one of the main areas of concern raised by critics.
They fear that the law could create a mechanism through which families or other complainants can trigger police investigations into relationships involving people of different religions.
They argue that ordinary family disagreements or opposition to an interfaith relationship should not automatically become matters for criminal investigation.
The government maintains that the law is aimed at unlawful conversion and not at consensual interfaith relationships.
What is the concern about the burden of proof?
Critics have raised concerns about provisions that they say place obligations on an accused person to establish that a conversion was lawful or voluntary.
They argue that this can differ from the traditional criminal-law principle that the prosecution must establish guilt.
They say such provisions could have a chilling effect, particularly on people involved in legitimate religious conversions or interfaith relationships.
What are the concerns regarding women’s autonomy?
Critics argue that the law could disproportionately affect women involved in interfaith relationships.
They point to provisions allowing complaints by family members, advance-notice requirements and police investigations.
They say these provisions could allow families to challenge the religious and personal choices of adult women.
The concern raised by opponents is that the State could exercise greater control over decisions that should primarily belong to the individual.
Does the law violate the Constitution?
That is ultimately a matter for judicial interpretation.A challenge on constitutional grounds does not by itself establish that a law is unconstitutional. However, critics have raised constitutional questions involving equality, personal liberty, privacy, decisional autonomy and freedom of conscience.
What punishment does the law prescribe?
The Act provides imprisonment between seven and ten years and fines for unlawful conversion, with stronger punishment in specified circumstances.
Are there higher punishments in some cases?
Yes. The Act provides enhanced punishment in specified cases involving women, minors and members of Scheduled Castes (SCs) or Scheduled Tribes (STs).
