1

DAMODARAM SANJIVAYYA
NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY
SABBAVARAM, VISAKHAPATNAM, AP., INDIA.

PROJECT TITLE

‘MASS RELIGIOUS CONVERSIONS IN INDIA AND ANTI-CONVERSION

LAWS’

SUBJECT

LEGAL LANGUAGE AND WRITING

NAME OF THE FACULTY

DR. K ARUNA

NAME OF THE CANDIDATE: JAHNAVI GOPALUNI

ROLL NO. 2020LLB035

SEMESTER II
 2

CERTIFICATE
Title of the subject: Legal writing
Name of the faculty: Dr. K Aruna

I, Jahnavi Gopaluni, hereby declare that this research work titled “MASS RELIGIOUS
CONVERSIONS IN INDIA AND ANTI-CONVERSION LAWS” is submitted by me is an original work
undertaken by me. I have duly acknowledged all the sources from which the ideas have been taken. To
the best of my knowledge, the projects free from any plagiarism issue.

Name: Jahnavi Gopaluni

Roll No. 20LLB035

Semester II

ACKNOLEDGEMENT
 3

I would like to sincerely convey my heartfelt appreciation to our respected Legal writing professor, Dr. K
Aruna Ma’am for giving me a great opportunity to make my project and for providing me with the
guidance to finish the research essay successfully.

I would also like to thank my classmates for giving their valuable insights and for co-operation.

I have attempted to collect information and compiled it here to the best of my knowledge.
 4

TABLE OF CONTENTS
CONTENTS Pg. No

1. INTRODUCTION 5-7

2. RIGHT TO RELIGION IN INDIAN LAW 7-10

3. ANTI-CONVERSION LEGISLATIONS 10-18

4. LEGALITY OF ANTI-CONVERSION 18-19

LEGISLATION

5. LEGAL PROCEDURE TO CONVERT IN INDIA 19-21

6. CONCLUSION 22

7. BIBLIOGRAPHY 22
 5
INTRODUCTION
Almost every state in the world provides the right to practice or profess any religion and to
hold any faith or belief. Religious freedom is recognised as a human right by the United
Nations and several international human rights forums, which offer international laws and
standards to safeguard an individual's religious freedom. Religious freedom is seen as a core
human right in all civilized nations. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights provides
everyone the right to freedom of expression, conscience, and religion, which includes the
right to change faith or belief. 1
India, being a democratic nation with strong liberal
antecedents, has provided freedom of religious expression, profession, practice and
propagation of faith to all citizens equally.2

Adopting a new religion, one that differs from a person’s prior religion or the religion of their
birth, is known as religious conversion. People convert to different religions for a variety of
reasons such as:

 “ Conversion by free will or free choice”

 “ Conversion due to change of beliefs”

 “ Conversion for convenience”

 “ Conversion due to marriage”

 “ Conversion by force”

Everybody has the freedom to practice the religion of their birth or any other religion of their
choice. It is a constitutional right for a person to select their own religion, but forcing or
persuading someone to convert their religion is deemed as a crime. When people are forced to
convert using deceptive means for wrongful gains, it is considered to be forced conversion.

India is a country with a wide range of religious beliefs and diverse faiths. On Indian land,
various religions and faiths have taken birth. In India's famously inclusive tradition,
practitioners of diverse religions have peacefully coexisted for generations. When we look at
the history of religious conversions in India, we can see that Conversion has been frequent in

1
UN General Assembly, Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Paris, 1948) 217 [III] A, Art. 18.
2
Constitution of India 1950, art. 25.
 6
India from the dawn of the civilization, some were through choice and others as a result of
intimidation. When alternatives to Brahmanism were first disseminated in India, many others,
such as Ashoka the Great and Mahavira, championed Buddhism and Jainism as alternatives
to Vedic Brahmanism's ritualism. Emperor Ashoka dispatched envoys to many regions of the
realm and other kingdoms, and he himself embarked on religious pilgrimages to encourage
others to embrace Buddhism. However, the entire process was peaceful, and interfaith
conversions were totally voluntary and were carried on through the spread of wisdom. 3

Islam was spread after the arrival of the Mughal invaders. This period was infamous for the
most heinous crimes and innumerable forced conversions. MA Khan used the expression
"conversion by sword" to describe the conversions that took place during the Mughal period. 4
Sikhism also emerged in the 15th century. Christianity in India dates back to roughly 48 AD,
when Saint Thomas, the Apostle, arrived in India. The British government subsequently
provided state patronage to missionaries who were involved in conversion activities. These
missionaries frequently target those who are socially depressed, politically uninformed, and
economically disadvantaged. This has persisted even in this contemporary era of
technological advancement.

India is a secular nation, according to its constitution, with no state-sanctioned official

religion. As a secular state, India's constitution guarantees equal protection to all religions.
The Constitution of India designated secular status to India in 1950 by the 42nd Amendment
Act of 1976, which implies that everyone has the right to peacefully practice their beliefs. In
India, religious propagation is protected by the Constitution as a right to religious freedom. 5
Article 25 of the Indian constitution guarantees religious freedom as a fundamental right.
Although the Indian constitution guarantees freedom of religion and the right to practice one's
own religion, it does not specifically address the right to convert from one religion to another.
6

3
‘Two buddhas in Hinduism and Buddhism’ (Booksfacts, 2014)
<https://www.booksfact.com/religions/two-buddhas-hinduism-buddhism.html> Accessed on 15 June
2021.

4
MA Khan, ‘Islamic Jihad: A Legacy of Forced Conversion, Imperialism, and Slavery' (2009) p52.

5
42nd Amendment Act, 1976.
6
Constitution of India 1950, art. 25.
 7
There may not be a constitutional right to convert to another faith, but there is clearly liberty
to do so if there is no compulsion, deception, or financial allurement involved in the
conversion process. But the question is, to what degree are these religious conversions
allowed by freedom of religion? The main objective of this essay is to examine the concept of
religious freedom as a fundamental right and in the context of religious conversions.

Mass religious conversions through illicit means have recently surfaced as a major socio-
legal issue in the country. The problem has recently been the subject of heated arguments,
and the issue has progressed to the point of jeopardising the country's social stability.
Following the passage of anti-conversion legislation in nine Indian states including Uttar
Pradesh recently, a new discussion about religious freedom has erupted. The court had
confirmed the constitutional validity of conversion-prohibition statutes adopted by Madhya
Pradesh and Orissa in a 1977 verdict in the case of Rev. Stanislaus vs. the State of Madhya
Pradesh. The court stated: “organised conversion, whether by force or fraud, or by providing
allurement to people taking advantage of their poverty and ignorance is anti-secular.” 7

The government of Uttar Pradesh has passed an anti-conversion law, allegedly with a
specific goal of combating fraudulent religious conversions under the guise of love and
marriage.  As a result, some state governments enacted anti-conversion legislation with the
goal of preventing conversions induced by compulsion or allurement. Such laws have been
widely criticized, and they are believed to be in violation of the constitution's provision of
religious freedom. In the upcoming chapters, we will look at the law and judicial decisions
pertaining to freedom of religion and religious conversions.

RIGHT TO RELIGION IN INDIAN LAW

Every democratic constitution considers religious and conscience freedom to be essential.
Religion and conscience are the most fundamental aspects of human character, and any
interference with their free exercise would be considered a grievous infringement of
the fundamental human right. 8

7
Anuja Prashar, ‘Conversion and Anti conversion in India Today’ (2006 Report Compiled for
Organisations Supporting and Upholding Freedom Of Religion, Human Rights And Democracy
Across The Globe) <https://harekrsna.com/sun/features/04-07/conversions.pdf> Accessed on 15 June
2021.
8
Faizan Mustafa and Anurag Sharma, ‘Conversion: Constitutional and Legal Implications’ (Kanishka
Publishers, New Delhi, 2003).
 8
“ Part III of the Indian Constitution guarantees various fundamental rights. Article 25- 28
provides for the right to freedom of religion which is largely based upon Irish Constitution.
Article 25(1) states that “Subject to public order, morality and health and to the other
”

provisions of this part, all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right
freely to profess, practice and propagate religion”. 9

“ Conscience refers to a man’s subjective sense of right or wrong. Freedom of conscience

means that a person is free to entertain any belief or doctrine regarded by him as conducive to
his spiritual well-being. This implies that the state cannot enquire into or take notice of a
man’s religious or moral beliefs. Freedom of conscience allows a person to believe in a
particular religious tenet of his choosing. This freedom is quite distinct from the freedom to
perform external acts in pursuance of that faith. So, it is very much evident from the words of
article 25(1) that this right is not restricted to Indian citizens only but also extends to all persons.”

“ Article 25 of Indian Constitution too provides for certain limitations. Article 25 begins with
the words ‘subject to public order, morality and health’. Clause (2) provides that nothing in
this article shall affect the operation of any existing law or prevent the state from making any
law.10 As far as the other part of article 25 is concerned that is right to freely ‘practice’,
‘profess’ and ‘propagate’ religion, the right to ‘profess’ religion is necessarily a consequence
to the freedom of conscience. Whereas freedom of conscience is something internal and
limited to the individual concerned, profession of religion implies affirmation of one’s belief
and faith publicly, by words of mouth or other conduct, freedom of conscience allows a
person to follow any religion of his choosing; whereas the right to profess religion entitles
him publicly to state his creed if he so desires. The right to profess religion necessarily
implies freedom to follow any religion or belief. No person can be compelled to profess a
particular religion or be bound to remain a member of a particular sect. If a person so desires,
he is absolutely free to change his religion, and whenever a question. ”
11

“ Article 26 states that subject to public order, morality and health, religious denominations or
any section shall have the right to freedom to run or manage religious affairs. 12
So, both

9
Constitution of India 1950, Art. 25(1).
10
Constitution of India 1950, Art. 25(2).
11
Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava, ‘Religious Freedom in India: A Historical and Constitutional Study’
(Deep and Deep Publications, New Delhi, 1982) p139.
12
Constitution of India 1950, Art. 26
 9
Articles 25 and 26 are not absolute but are subject to certain limitations to maintain public
order, morality, and peace in the country. For example, no one can practice sati in the name
of freedom of religion.”

“ Article 27 mandates that no person shall be compelled by the state to pay any taxes, the
proceeds of which are specifically appropriated in payment of expenses for the promotion or
maintenance of particular religion or religious denominations.13 Article 28 states that no
religious instruction shall be imparted in the state-funded educational institutions. ”
14

The question of whether the right to convert falls under the umbrella of the right to propagate
any religion is crucial in determining the legitimacy of anti-conversion legislation. Article 25
discusses the term 'propagate' which refers to the act of promoting, spreading, or simply
expressing oneself. When we look at the arguments in the Constituent Assembly, we can see
that one of the most intensely debated and contentious phrases that was finally placed in the
constitution was 'propagation'. The term 'propagation' has received a lot of criticism as well
as because of its association with the term 'conversion'.

The word "conversion" was used during the drafting of the Indian Constitution, but in the
final document, they followed the recommendations of the Sub-Committee on Minorities and
decided to use "propagate" instead of "conversion," leaving the question about whether the
right to propagate would include conversion open for debate. Propagation is not and cannot
be offensive in and itself.   However, such propagation must be without undue or coercive
elements and must not be motivated by a free wrong motive. It does not appear to be anything
illegal or unethical in persuasion if the motive is spiritual, for the purpose of enlightening
people.  However, in circumstances where the individual being persuaded is in a desperate
and vulnerable position, ‘conversions' that are carried out by ‘undue influence' or ‘coercion,'
which can be declared illegal and must be interfered with. 15

“ Even today this question cannot be answered that whether the right to propagate any religion
includes right to conversion or not. There is no expressed provision for ‘conversion’ in the
Indian Constitution but still, there are some whose contention is in the favours that right to

13
Constitution of India 1950, Art. 27.
14
Art. 28.
15
Ibid.
 10
conversion is implicit under Article 25 which emerges from freedom of conscience and on
the other hand there are some who opposes this.”

ANTI-CONVERSION LEGISLATIONS

Anti-conversion laws were passed in numerous princely states prior to independence, but

none existed in British India at a national level. The reason for this is likely due to the fact
that the British themselves indulged in proselytization activities, but the majority of Hindu
princely rulers opposed conversions to a foreign faith. The Rajgarh State passed the first anti-
conversion legislation in 1936, followed by the Patna Freedom of Religion Act, 1942, the
Surguza State Apostasy Act, 1945, and the Udaipur State Anti-Conversion Act, 1946.
According to research paper of the US Library of Congress (LOC): “laws restricting religious
conversions were originally introduced by princely states headed by Hindu royal families
during the British colonial period particularly during the latter half of the 1930s and 1940s.
These states enacted the laws in an attempt to preserve Hindu religious identity in the face of
British missionaries.” The LOC research paper indicates that there were “over a dozen
princely states, including Kota, Bikaner, Jodhpur, Raigarh, Patna, Surguja, Udaipur, and
Kalahandi” that had such laws. 16

The issue of conversion was one of the most intensely contested topics in the Constituent
Assembly. Though there was no disagreement on the facts of the argument that forceful
conversion should not or cannot be recognized by law, it was firmly thought that the
Constitution should not have express provisions for all such possible occurrences that might
easily be governed by regular laws.

Clause 17 read "Conversion from one religion to another brought about by coercion or undue
Influence shall not be recognised by law." The honourable Sardar Vallabhbhai J. Patel while
starting discussion on the topic said “The committee discussed this and there were several
other suggestions made by the House and the clause was referred back to the committee.
After further consideration of this clause, which enunciates an obvious principle, the

16
‘State Anti-conversion Laws in India’ (US Library of Congress, 2019)
<https://www.loc.gov/law/help/anti-conversion-laws/india.php> Accessed on 16 June 2021.
 11

committee came to the conclusion that it is not necessary to include this as a fundamental
right. It is illegal under the present law and it will be illegal at any time.” He further said
“there is no difference of opinion on the merits of the case that forcible conversion should not
be or cannot be recognised by law. On that principle there is no difference of opinion. The
question is only whether this clause is necessary in the list of fundamental rights. Now, if it is
an objective for the administration to act, it has a place in the second part which consists of
non-justiciable rights. If you think it is necessary, let us transfer it to the second part of the
schedule because it is admitted that in the law of the land forcible conversion is illegal. We
have even stopped forcible education and, we do not for a moment suggest that forcible
conversion of one by another from one religion to another will be recognised. But suppose
one thousand people are converted, that is not recognised. Will you go to a court of law and
ask it not to recognise it? It only creates complications; it gives no remedy. But if you want
this principle to be enunciated as a seventh clause, coming after clause 6, in the Second
Schedule, it is unnecessary to carry on any debate; you can do so. There is no difference of
opinion on the merits of the case. But at this stage to talk of forcible conversion on merits is
absurd, because there cannot be any question about it.” 17

“ Post-independence, there were many attempts made to enact a central legislation to regulate
religious conversions, all to no avail. However, at the state level there were isolated instances
of efforts made to have such legislations. India’s Freedom of Religion Acts or “anti-
conversion” laws are state-level statutes that have been enacted to regulate religious
conversions.  The laws are in force in eight out of twenty-nine states: Arunachal Pradesh,
Odisha, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, and
Uttarakhand.  While there are some variations between the state laws, they are very similar in
their content and structure.  All of the laws seek to prevent any person from converting or
attempting to convert, either directly or otherwise, another person through “forcible” or
“fraudulent” means, or by “allurement” or “inducement.”  Penalties for breaching the laws
can range from monetary fines to imprisonment, with punishments ranging from one to three
years of imprisonment and fines from 5,000 to 50,000 Indian rupees, some of the laws
provide for stiffer penalties if women, children, or members of scheduled castes or schedule
tribes (SC/ST) are being converted. ”
18

17
Constituent assembly debates, 1947, Clause 17 Vol 3 (accessed from <loksabhaph.nic.in>).
18
USLOC Report Ibid 16.
 12

ODISHA

Odisha was the first state to enact anti-conversion legislation, the Orissa Freedom of Religion
Act,1967. 19  Section 3 of that Act reads that “No person shall convert or attempt to convert,
either directly or otherwise, any person from one religious’ faith to another by the use of
force or by inducement or by any fraudulent means nor shall any person abet any such
conversion.”

The Act defines “conversion” as “renouncing one religion and adopting another.” It also
defines “force” to “include a show of force or a threat of injury of any kind, including the
threat of divine displeasure or social excommunication.” Under the Act, “inducement”
includes “the offer of any gift or gratification, either in cash or in kind, and shall also include
the grant of any benefit, either pecuniary or otherwise,” and “fraud” is defined to include
“misrepresentation or any other fraudulent contrivance.” Crimes under the Act are cognizable
“

offenses, meaning an investigation or an arrest can be made without a warrant or

authorization of a court.  However, an investigation can only be made by an officer not below
the rank of an Inspector of Police.”

“ In 1973, the High Court of Orissa declared that the Orissa Freedom of Religion Act,1967 is
“ultra vires the Constitution.” 20  The Court held in its conclusions that article 25(1) of the
Constitution “guarantees propagation of religion and conversion is a part of the Christian
religion,” that “the term ‘inducement’ is vague and many proselytizing activities may be
covered by the definition and the restriction in Article 25(1) cannot be said to cover the wide
definition. However, this decision was overturned by the Supreme Court of India in Rev.
Stainislaus v. State of Madhya Pradesh, which is discussed in more detail below.”

MADHYA PRADESH

The State of Madhya Pradesh was the second state to enact an anti-conversion law, the
Madhya Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act, 1968.  Instead of using the term “inducement,”
the Act uses the term “allurement”, defined as an offer of any temptation in the form of

19
Orissa Freedom of Religion Act, No. 2 of 1968 (Accessed
from http://lawodisha.gov.in/files/acts/act_884132771_ 1437 987451.pdf ).
20
Yulitha Hyde & Ors. v. State of Orissa & Ors, A.I.R. 1973 116 (Ori).
 13
(i) any gift or gratification, either in cash or kind;

(ii) grant of any material benefit, either monetary or otherwise.

Section 3 of the Act states that “No person shall convert or attempt to convert, either directly
or otherwise, any person from one faith to another by the use of force or by allurement or by
any fraudulent means nor shall any person abet any such conversion.”  The crime is
punishable with imprisonment of up to one year, a fine of up to 5,000 rupees, or both.  If the
crime is committed against a minor, woman, or person belonging to an SC/ST, the term of
imprisonment may be increased to a maximum of two years and the fine up to 10,000 rupees.
Under section 5 of the Act, notice of the conversion must be given to the District Magistrate
by the religious priest or the person who converts any person “within seven days after the
date of such ceremony.” 21

“ Unlike the Orissa High Court, in 1977 the Madya Pradesh High Court upheld the Madhya
Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act, 1968, holding that the relevant sections “establish the
equality of religious freedom for all citizens by prohibiting conversion by objectionable
activities such, as conversion by force, fraud and by allurement. ”
22

“ The Madhya Pradesh Legislative Assembly approved a similar amendment to the state’s
1968 anti-conversion law in August 2013 “that would make the law more
stringent.”  According to a news report, the 2013 amendment would enhance jail terms and
fines for forced conversions (up to three years and a fine of up to 50,000 rupees, and in the
case of a minor, woman, or person belonging to an SC/ST up to four years and a fine of up to
100,000 rupees), make it compulsory for the priest to request prior permission for the
proposed conversion before conversion, and require the person who has converted to inform
authorities within a stipulated period of time.”

ARUNACHAL PRADESH

“ Following the High Court cases in Orissa and Madhya Pradesh, anti-conversion legislation
was implemented in the states of Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, and Arunachal Pradesh in

21
Madhya Pradesh Dharm Swatantrya Adhiniyam [Madhya Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act],
1968, (Accessed.from http://www.kandhamal.net/DownloadMat/Madhya_Pradesh_Freedom_of_Reli
gion_Act.pdf)
22
Rev. Stainislaus v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors., 1977 A.I.R. 908.
 14
1978.  The State of Arunachal Pradesh’s anti-conversion provisions are contained in the
Arunachal Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act, 1978, and are along similar lines to those
enacted in Orissa and Madhya Pradesh. The law, which was passed “in the view of the
perceived threat to indigenous religions,” received presidential assent on October 25, 1978.
However, it does not appear to be enforced because the government has yet to frame the rules
needed to implement it. 23 ”

CHATTISGARH

“ The State of Chhattisgarh was established in November 2000 as a result of the partitioning of
the south-eastern districts of Madhya Pradesh.  Chhattisgarh reportedly retained the anti-
conversion law of Madhya Pradesh and adopted it under the title Chhattisgarh Freedom of
Religion Act, 1968. ”
24

GUJARAT

“ The anti-conversion law in the State of Gujarat was enacted as the Gujarat Freedom of
Religion Act, 2003.  The purpose of the Act is to prohibit conversions from one religion to
another by the use of force, allurement, or fraudulent means.”

“ Unlike the other state acts where only prior or subsequent notice is required, under section 5
of the Gujarat Act, a person wanting to convert must seek prior permission from the District
Magistrate with respect to the conversion. The section also requires the person who is
converted to send a notice to the District Magistrate of the “[district] concerned in which the
ceremony has taken place of the fact of such conversion within such period and in such form
as may be prescribed by rules.” The Gujarat Freedom of Religion Rules 2008 stipulate that
such a notice should be given “within ten days from the date of such conversion ceremony.”
Failure to comply with this permission or notice provisions is punishable by imprisonment
for up to one year or a fine of up to 1,000 rupees, or both. ”
25

“ On July 21, 2006, an amendment bill known as the Gujarat Freedom of Religion
(Amendment) Act, 2006, was passed by the BJP state-level government.  The bill’s aim was
23
Arunachal Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act, 1978, (Accessed from http://acts.gov.in/AR/2897.pdf )
24
‘Chhattisgarh Passes Anti-conversion Bill’ (Gulf News,
2006) <http://gulfnews.com/news/asia/india/ chhattisgarh-passes-anti-conversion-bill-1.248514>
Accessed on 16 June 2021.
25
Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act, 2003, (Accessed from https://home.gujarat.gov.in/Upload/Gujarat
Freedom of Religion Act2003_new_home_1_1_221015.pdf).
 15
to replace section 2(b) of the original Act, which defined the word “convert,” and to provide
clarifying explanations.  26”

HIMACHAL PRADESH

The Himachal Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act, 2006 is “modelled on existing anti-
conversion laws in other Indian states” and came into effect on February 18, 2007. Its
passage is all the more amusing given the fact that the state administration is run by the
Congress Party, which has long sought to establish itself as a party with secular reputation.

“ Himachal passed its law in 2019, repealing the Himachal Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act,
2006. While the 2019 law has added provisions related to conversions for the purpose of
marriage, the aspect of prior declaration before the district magistrate existed in the 2006 law
as well. Incidentally, the High Court had struck down the prior notice provisions as
unconstitutional and violative of the fundamental right to privacy. ”
27

RAJASTHAN

Rajasthan proposed to enact laws similar to that of other states in 2006, but it was stalled due
to complaints received by the governor from religious minority groups in the state. 28

TAMIL NADU

In 2002, the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Forcible Conversion of Religion Ordinance was
passed, however it was quickly repealed by the then Tamil Nadu government.  The Act,
which has since been revoked, was passed on the proposal of the late Jayalalithaa, the former

26
Ibid
27
Apporva Vishwanath, ’3 states, 3 anti-conversion laws: what's similar, what's different’ (Indian
Express, 3 Jan 2021, New Delhi) <https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/religion-conversion-
bill-bjp-7129285/> Accessed on 16 June 2021.
28
‘Rajasthan Governor Refuses to Sign Anti-conversion Bill’ (The Hindu,21 April 2011)
<http://www.thehindu.com/news/the-india-cables/the-cables/64917-Rajasthan-governor-refuses-to-
sign-anti-conversion-bill/article14690462.ece> Accessed on 17 June 2021.
 16
Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu state. The Act followed the general guidelines set forth in the
Orissa Freedom of Religion Act of 1967. 29

In protest of the new anti-conversion regulations, thousands of Dalits were converted to

Christianity and Buddhism without the permission of the local magistrate thus violating the
law. The Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Forcible Conversion of Religion Act was abolished by
the state government on May 21, 2004, due to political repercussions and opposition from
minorities to the anti-conversion provisions. 30

UTTARAKHAND

“ On November 20, 2017, the High Court of Uttarakhand issued a decision in the context of a
habeas corpus petition suggesting that the state government pass an anti-conversion law. The
petition sought the production of one Ms. Sharma, who had allegedly married a Husain
Ansari. Mr. Sharma’s conversion to Hinduism as well as his marriage to Ms. Sharma were
contested in the case. 31 The Court noted that: “this case is not the first case the court has
”

considered involving inter-religious marriages, and that in some of these cases conversion is a
sham undertaken to facilitate the process of marriage. In order to curb this tendency, the State
Govt. is expected by the court to legislate the Freedom of Religion Act on the analogy of
Madhya Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act, 1968 as well as Himachal Pradesh Freedom of
Religion Act, 2006, without hurting the religious sentiments of citizens.” 32
On December 2017, the ruling BJP held a party meeting at which the state's Chief Minister
announced that the administration would introduce an anti-conversion law in the State
Assembly. On March 21, 2018, four months following the High Court's order, the state
government filed the measure to the State Assembly. On the April of 2018, the Assembly
approved the law and the Governor subsequently signed it.

29
‘Government Announces Anti-Conversion Law Not in Force in Tamil Nadu, India’ (Christian
Today, 25 May
2005), <http://www.christiantoday.com/article/government.announces.anti.conversion.law.not.in.forc
e.in. tamil.nadu.india/2969.htm> Accessed on 17 June 2021.
30
Ibid
31
 Girish Kumar Sharma v. State of Uttarakhand & others, Habeas Corpus Petition No. 20 of 2017
(Nov. 14, 2017).
32
Apoorva Mandhani, ‘Uttarakhand HC Suggests Enactment of Freedom of Religion Act to Curb
“Sham Conversions” for Marriage’ ( LiveLaw, 20 November 2017)
<http://www.livelaw.in/uttarakhand-hc-suggests-enactment-freedom-religion-act-curb-sham-
conversions-marriage-read-order/> Accessed on 17 June 2021.
 17
The legislation in Uttarakhand differs from those in other states in that it includes a provision
on marriage and religious conversion that reads as follows:

“Any marriage which was done for the sole purpose of conversion by the man of one religion
with the woman of another religion either by converting himself before or after marriage or
by converting the woman before or after marriage may be declared null and void by the
Family Court or where [a] Family Court is not established, the Court having jurisdiction to
try such case on a petition presented by either party thereto against the other party of
the marriage.” 33

UTTAR PRADESH

The Uttar Pradesh State Panel Recommended a separate provision to address

growing coerced conversion cases in a report released in 2019. The Commission suggested
that fraudulent conversion, including conversions exclusively for the sake of marriage, be
punished in a proposed Legislation filed with the report. Following that, the Ordinance was
enacted.

“ The Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Ordinance, 2020 was
promulgated by UP government under BJP Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath which also
quickly received governor’s assent. 34 The Ordinance prohibits conversion of religion through
means, such as: (i) force, misrepresentation, undue influence, and allurement, or (ii) fraud, or
(iii) marriage. The Ordinance assigns the burden of proof of the lawfulness of religious
conversion to the persons causing or facilitating such conversions. However, a person
reconverting to his/her immediate previous religion is allowed. ”

“ Special emphasis has been given to marriages for sole purpose of conversion under this law
as recent rise in cases of alleged incidents dubbed as “love Jihad” in the state of Uttar Pradesh
have been in the centre of media attention. Under the Ordinance, a marriage is liable to be
declared void if it was done for the sole purpose of unlawful conversion, or vice-versa.
However, a marriage involving religious conversion is permitted if the conversion is
undergone as per the procedure laid down under the Ordinance. The Ordinance provides for
33
Ibid.
34
Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Ordinance, 2020 (Accessed from
https://prsindia.org/bills/states/the-uttar-pradesh-prohibition-of-unlawful-conversion-of-religion-
ordinance-2020).
 18

punishment for causing or facilitating unlawful religious conversion. It also makes such an
act of conversion a non-bailable criminal offence. ”
35

LEGALITY OF ANTI-CONVERSION LEGISLATION

“ In Yulitha Hyde and Others v. State of Orissa and Others, 36 The Orissa Dharma swatantrya
Adhiniyam, 1968 (the Orissa Freedom of Religion Act) was challenged on the ground that
the extended meaning which is given by the Act to the words ‘force, fraud and inducement’ is
beyond the scope of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the Act infringes the fundamental right
guaranteed under article 25. Act penalized those conversions which took place due to force,
fraud or inducement. Court held the Act unconstitutional and declared it ultra vires. Later,
Supreme Court overruled the decision and made the Act constitutional.”

“ In Stainislaus Rev. v. State of M.P, 37 Supreme Court held that the right to propagate one’s
religion means the right to communicate a person’s beliefs to another person or to expose the
tenets of that faith, but would not include the right to ‘convert’ another person to the former’s
faith because the latter person is “equally entitled to freedom of conscience” which words
precede the word ‘propagate’. So, nobody has any fundamental right to convert the religion
of someone without his free choice. Further, Court held that the word propagate does not give
rise to the right to convert. The Court upheld the validity of the earliest anti-conversion
statutes: the Madhya Pradesh Dharma Swatantraya Adhiniyam, 1968, and the Orissa
Freedom of Religion Act, 1967.  This holding was summed up by the Court as follows:”

“It has to be remembered that Article 25(1) guarantees “freedom of conscience” to every
citizen, and not merely to the followers of one particular religion, and that, in turn, postulates
that there is no fundamental right to convert another person to one’s own religion because if a
person purposely undertakes the conversion of another person to his religion, as distinguished
from his effort to transmit or spread the tenets of his religion, that would impinge on the
freedom of conscience guaranteed to all the citizens of the country alike.”
35
Anisha Mathur, ‘UP’s ‘anti-Love Jihad’ ordinance: Past, present and legal hurdles ahead’ (India
Today, 25 November 2020) <https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/up-s-anti-love-jihad-ordinance-
past-present-and-legal-hurdles-ahead-1744069-2020-11-25> Accessed on 18 June 2021.
36
Yulitha Hyde and Others v. State of Orissa and Others, AIR 1973 Ori 116.
37
Rev. Stainislaus v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (1977) 1 SCC 677 (Online).
 19
“ Because article 25(1) stipulates that the right is subject to public order, the Court also found
that the acts clearly provide for the maintenance of public order for, if forcible conversion
had not been prohibited, that would have created public disorder in the States, and that the
expression ‘Public order’ is of wide connotation.” 

LEGAL PROCEDURE TO CONVERT IN INDIA

Changing one's faith is not governed by any statute. In many past precedents of the Supreme
Court it has been ruled that conversions do not require any special legal criteria, formalities,
religious rituals, or ceremonies. With accordance with the law, anyone can convert their
religion. Conversion does not occur simply by making an oral or written declaration. It is
required to provide supporting details of the intention to convert, as well activities to carry
out that intention should be matched. To conclude that real conversion has occurred, a
genuine intention must be followed by subsequent behaviour that clearly indicate that
purpose. 38

Once a religious conversion has occurred, it must be published in the Government Gazette so
that the converted religion could be referenced in all public records. In Kailash Sonkar vs.
Smt. Maya Devi, 39
For reconversion, the Supreme Court suggested much of the same
procedure.  If a member of a particular religion wishes to convert to another faith, he must
first obtain the consent of the district magistrate. The lack of any written law creates a legal
void, placing the weight of proof on the Registration Officer to determine whether the
conversion was legitimate or not.

CONVERSION TO ISLAM:

Anyone who wishes to convert to a different religion can do so by following the religion's
personal law as well. The numerous personal laws specify the rituals that must be done in a
specific order during the conversion process. It is not essential for a Muslim to be born into

38
Law Commission of India, Conversion/ Reconversion to Another Religion (Report No. 235,
December 2010).
39
Kailash Sonkar vs. Smt. Maya Devi, AIR 1984 SC 600.
 20
the faith. Acknowledging God's oneness and Muhammad's prophecy is a simple way to
convert to Islam.

Islamic legal theory discusses religious belief, i.e., a believer in Islam can embrace the
Islamic faith even if he was not born a Muslim. Anyone over the age of adulthood and of
competent mind at the time of conversion can convert to Islam in one of two ways:

 By declaration: He must formally proclaim that he has forsaken his previous

religion in order to practise Islam. He must believe that there is no god but Allah,
and that Mohammad is Allah's prophet. He must trust alone in Allah and that the
Holy Quran is God's actual message. He must embrace Islam as his faith.
 Through ceremonies: A person can convert to Islam by executing certain religious
ceremonies as specified by Islam. To begin with, the individual must travel to the
mosque, where the imam will invite him to say "Shahada," or "faith testimony."
“La ilaha illa Allah, Muhammad rasool Allah,” it should be said, just listen to the
testimony is not enough. He should recite it with sincerity and comprehension of
the proper meaning, which is "that there is no true deity except Allah, and
Muhammad is the true messenger sent by God to humanity." After he reads
Kalema, he is granted a Muslim name, which must be recorded in the Imam's
registry.

So, these are the two basic methods for enunciating one's former religion and converting to
Islam. However, such conversions must be carried out without the use of deception or unjust
gain. The premise of conversion may be disputed if the individual who is converting his
religion engages in behaviour that is incompatible with Islam.

CONVERSION TO HINDUISM:

Since Hinduism is viewed as a way of life, the Hindu Scriptures do not specify any
mechanism for converting from another faith to Hinduism. He will be considered a Hindu
once he has expressed honest intentions to convert to Hinduism. Anyone interested in
becoming a follower might seek assistance from the Arya Samaj, a religious group. Any Arya
Samaj temple can accept a request for conversion by free will, together with a certificate
 21
proving the individual's age and domicile, signed by the applicant and two witnesses. It also
includes a “Shuddhi Karma” Vedic purifying method. Shuddhi Karma entails performing a
Hindu ritual called "Homam" before a fire. The applicant would receive a conversion
certification as a result of this. 40

CONVERSION TO CHRISTIANITY:

There is no special process or ceremony that should be followed while converting to

Christianity. Different Christian sects engage in religious ceremonies or rituals. Any non-
Christian can forsake their previous religion and embrace Christianity by professing
repentance for past misdeeds, believing in Jesus as their Lord, and vowing to follow his
example as recorded in the New Testament. Baptism is the ritual that is widely agreed among
Christians as the means of conversion. Baptism must be done in the name of the father, son,
and Holy Spirit.

CONCLUSION

For a long time, the country has sensed the need for a powerful anti-conversion  law.
Some states have anti-conversion legislations in place, but there is none at the national
level. Some critics argue that the regulations create a hostile, and sometimes violent,
atmosphere for religious minorities.  Despite the fact that India's anti-conversion laws
have been heavily criticized, several human rights organisations have admitted that the
laws have resulted in few arrests and no convictions.

40
Law commission report, 38.
 22
As previously stated, every citizen of India has the right to profess, practise, and
promote their religion under the Indian constitution. However, appropriate limitations
are placed on this privilege, prohibiting the coercive nature of religious conversion. A
person cannot be tempted or lured to convert by material rewards. A person's decision
to convert from one religion to another should be based only on the merits of the faith
and its teachings. Mass conversions through deception result in demographic
aggressiveness, generating social turmoil and damaging society's social fabric.

These regulations are important in order to preserve India's unique social fabric.
However, further judicial scrutiny is required to assess the merits and demerits of anti-
conversion legislation in order to ensure that it is fully in accordance  with the
country's constitution.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Constitution of India 1950.

2. Law Commission of India, Conversion/ Reconversion to Another Religion (Report
No. 235, 2010).
3. US Library of Congress Report (USLOC), 2019.
4. Constituent assembly debates, 1947, Clause 17 Vol 3.
5. Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act, 2003.
 23
6. Madhya Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act, 1968.
7. Arunachal Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act, 1978.
8. Orissa Freedom of Religion Act, No. 2 of 1968.
9. SCC
10. Westlaw India
11. Indian Kanoon
12. India Today
13. The Hindu
14. Indian express
15. Live law.