The Maharashtra Legislative Assembly has recently approved the Maharashtra Dharma Swatantrya Adhiniyam 2026, known as the Freedom of Religion Bill 2026. The purpose of this bill is to create guidelines for the process of religious conversions and also to penalise religious conversions that result from coercion, deception or other encouraging forces.

But…um..it did not sit well with many. 

According to the state government, the intent behind this legislation is to provide citizens with protection and non-forced religious conversions. Critics have pointed out that there are many aspects of the bill that would impact their personal freedoms and the rights of minorities. So, who is right and more importantly, who is wrong here? 

What is the Freedom of Religion Bill 2026?

The Freedom of Religion Bill 2026 is Maharashtra’s proposed anti-conversion law which aims to limit religious conversions that happen via:

• Coercion or force.

• Deception or misrepresentation.

• Inducement or allurement.

• Marriages performed with the intent of converting to another religion.

This legislation was introduced by the Mahayuti-led government, and passed on March 16, 2026 by the state assembly. This bill is now awaiting further passage through the legislative process prior to becoming law.

The government believes that this is a way of protecting individuals from manipulation during a transition to a new religion while still maintaining their right to convert freely.

Prominent Provisions of the Maharashtra Anti-Conversion Bill

The proposed statue contains a variety of procedural and criminal regulations governing the processUnlawful Conversion of Religion

The unlawful conversion of religion by any means of the following is prohibited:

   • Fraudulent or deceptive methods

   • Force or threat

   • Alternative forms of coercive inducement ie child support, employment, gifts made by promise etc

   • Or a partnership/marriage with the intent to convert to the Church.

Converted individuals who have converted unlawfully as a result of the above methods will be deemed unlawful by this law.

2. Mandatory Submission of Notice to District Official Prior to Conversion

A controversial provision of this law includes a requirement that individuals intending to convert should provide a written notice to the district official or the magistrate of their intentions 60 days prior to conversion to another religion.

The person conducting the religious conversion ceremony must submit notification to the district magistrate.

Supporters of this provision argue that it is intended to support law enforcement by verifying proof of voluntary conversion and increasing the likelihood of legitimate conversions.

Critics argue this provision infringes on an individual’s right to privacy and autonomy.

3. Appearance of Converted Individuals Prior to District Official

Individuals may be required to appear before a district official after they have converted. The new convert must show proof the conversion was voluntary and not through coercion or inducement as determined by the law.

4. Burden of Proof Shifted to the Accused

Another highly controversial provision includes the shifting of the burden of proof to the accused in cases of a religious conversion with no evidence of illegality.

The accused has the burden of establishing their conversion was voluntary and not by illegal means when a complaint is filed by a third party.

Civil liberties groups oppose this provision and suggest that the shifting of the burden of proof to the accused will provide a forum for punishing innocent individuals.

Offences covered by the bill fall into one of two categories: cognisable (where police can detain suspects without a warrant) or non-bailable (where bail is not a right). 

Complaints of alleged forced conversions may be filed by not only the individual who has been converted but also by: 

– a parent; 

– a sibling; or 

– any relative.

In certain cases, it is even possible for the authorities to take action on their own.

According to the government, this provision provides an avenue for individuals who otherwise may not be able to file a complaint with the police, and provides a means for parents or family members of those who are converted to protect their loved ones.

Conversions that are completed as part of a marriage will fall under additional scrutiny. 

If the authorities find that the primary purpose of a marriage was to enable a religious conversion, they may conduct an investigation into the conversion itself, and impose penalties for violations.

Others have pointed to the provisions of this bill, and its genesis in other states within India, that have similar anti-conversion laws, as validation for this legislation.

The bill provides for severe penalties for violations of the provisions of this bill. Offences under this law include: 

    • Penalties of up to 7 years imprisonment and/or 1 Lakh fine

    • If a conversion involves women, minors, persons with disabilities or unsound minds, or members of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, the penalties will increase to 7 years imprisonment and/or 5 Lakh fine.

Mass Conversion:

    • If there are many conversions at once, these will also carry the same penalties.

Repeat Offenders:

    • Repeat offenders can be sentenced to up to 10 years and higher fine amounts.

What If An Illegal Conversion Occurs During A Marriage?

If there is an illegal conversion, and afterwards a child is born from that marriage, the child will legally be considered to be from the mother’s religion as it was at the time of marriage, not as it will after illegal conversions.

This provision is specifically made to deal with any legal issues which may occur if the conversion is declared to be illegal/invalid.

Why Does The Government Feel This Law Is Necessary?

Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis has stated that the bill does not target any religion.

The Government says that the law is intended to:

    • Stop religious conversions by committing fraud and/or inducting someone through financial means.

    • Protect the interests of vulnerable groups.

    • Maintain law and order.

    • Ensure that religious conversions occur by people’s freewill to the greatest extent possible.

It is also stated that numerous states in India have similar laws (e.g., Gujarat, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Haryana and Karnataka).

The Government cites its authority from the Constitution when explaining that although individuals have the right to practice and to promote their own religion, the right to [practice] does not give them the right to convert someone through coercion and/or trickery.

What are the critics saying? 

Opposition leaders and civil rights advocates raise many concerns:

1) Privacy Right Concerns:

The requirement to notify the government of any conversions may violate people’s right to privacy. 

2) Effects of Interfaith Marriages:

Many activists are concerned that the law will have an increased scrutiny of interfaith marriages, particularly those which result from conversion.

3) Potential Use Abuse of the Law:

The law allows people (relatives and/or non-relatives) to go to court to make complaints against individuals who have converted to another religion which could be used to cause problems in family and/or romantic relationships.

4) Burden of Proof issues:

Legal scholars have pointed out that requiring the defendant to prove their innocence is contrary to the criminal justice system. What they mean is that it goes directly against the system. 

The Political Debate About The Bill

There has been a great deal of political debate regarding this legislation.

    •    Several opposition parties called for the bill to go to a select committee for greater investigation.

    •    Others expressed concern that if the law is used improperly, it would result in the vigilante conduct of the offenders.

On the other hand, there are several legislators who support the bill (including members of the Shiv Sena (UBT)) who have indicated that their support is to promote the freedom of religion while preventing people from being forced/coerced into changing their religious beliefs.