Introduction
The enactment of anti-conversion laws in various Indian states has sparked intense debate around the balance between individual rights and state control. India as a democratic nation carries a vast spectrum of religious beliefs and faith. As of the2011 census, there are 79.8 percent Hindus, 14.2 percent Muslims, 2.3 percent Christians, and 1.7 percent Sikh and a smaller percentage of Buddhists, Jains, and other faiths also reside in India.
[i] To maintain harmony between these various communities’ anti-conversion laws are brought, however, these laws are often viewed as weapons by the state to destroy India’s pluralist fabric. Anti-conversion laws are brought to prevent religious conversion that takes place on the pretext of financial incentives, coercion, force, and manipulation. Uttar Pradesh alone between 2021 and 2023 reported 427 cases of forced conversion. As of now, a total of 12 states have brought the anti-conversion law. However, there is a constitutional paradox and split personality of the Supreme Court that has always brought this law into question. This blog analyses the constitutional validity of such laws and explores their broader social impact.
Constitutional and legal framework
India’s constitution guarantees the right to religious freedom. Article 25 of the Indian constitution mentions that everyone has the freedom of conscience and the right to freely profess, practice, and propagate their religion. However, these freedoms are subject to certain restrictions like public order, morality, and health. Article 26 grants autonomy to religious denominations to manage their affairs in matters of religion.
[ii] Despite these constitutional protections anti-conversion laws are brought by 12 Indian states to criminalize the conversions based on force, fraud, andallurement. In December 2020. A Mumbai-based NGO, the Citizens for Justice and Peace filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court questioning the constitutional validity of anti-conversion laws, wherein they contend that these laws violate freedom of choice, privacy, the right to personal liberty, and conscience.
[iii] These laws impose unjust criminal sanctions, to deter citizens from involving in illegal conversions. The process of getting converted has also become very complicated. Section 8 of Uttarakhand Freedom of Religion Act, 2018 requires the person willing to convert, to file a declaration before the district magistrate, one month before such conversion. In Uttar Pradesh, this period is 60 days. The person performing the act of conversion has to also follow this. The petition mentions that the laws violate the freedom guaranteed by articles 25 and 26 by imposing unreasonable restrictions and surveillance on it. The Hon’ble Supreme Court many times through different cases like SR Bommai
[iv] and Kesavananda Bharti[v] has upheld secularism as the basic feature of the Indian constitution. Thus, by imposing the responsibility upon the state to protect the religious rights of its citizens, however, by bringing such laws the state is infringing upon the right to freely practice one religion. The laws also violate privacy by mandating the approval of a district magistrate as the process requires one to submit documents, and restrict a person’s autonomy.
The Supreme Court in the case of K.S Puttaswamy v Union of India and Navtej Singh Johar has emphasized privacy as the fundamental right. State intervention in the religious faith produces a chilling effect on the constitutionally guaranteed freedoms and liberties. The burden of proof in criminal cases generally lies with the prosecution, however, in this law, the burden of proof lies on the person causing such conversion. This increases the chance of false complaints.
In 2022 the Ministry of Home Affairs admitted that it doesn’t have any data on forced conversion, even though many states continue to enact anti-conversion laws. However, a Pew Research Centre study in 2021 shows only 0.4 percent cases of religious conversion in India, with no significant impact on overall religious composition. The National Human Rights Commission and Law Commission have also raised objections regarding the potential misuse of this law, calling these laws more of a mechanism of control than of justice.
The Spread of Anti-Conversion Laws Across Indian States: Data, Trends, and ground realities
As of 2025, a total of 12 states have enacted the anti-conversion law. A common legal feature across these laws is the stringent punishment. The law provides for punishment between 10 and 15 years and fines up to twenty-five thousand. However, despite the stringency of the law, data suggest otherwise. Also, there is no official data on the number of forced conversions. The recent case studies show the operational challenges this law contains. In Sitapur, Uttar Pradesh (2022), a man was arrested for allegedly converting his partner, despite her affidavit affirming voluntary conversion months before marriage.
In Jhabua, Madhya Pradesh (2021), police detained 12 individuals for attending a Christian prayer meeting, based on suspicion of conversion activities, but no conversion-related material or testimony was found. A similar trend has been observed in other states also. In a statement in 2022, Justice A.P. Shah pointed out the procedural concern related to anti-conversion law. He argues that these laws “invert the presumption of innocence” by placing the burden of proof on the accused and creating a conflict with Articles 25 to 28 of the Constitution.
While the Supreme Court of India has upheld the states’ legislative competence in regulating religion, the Court has not yet evaluated the newer laws’ compatibility with fundamental rights post-Puttaswamy. The ground-level reality and data suggest a conflict between the legislative intent of these laws and their practical enforcement, raising questions about evidentiary thresholds, individual rights, and the broader social consequences of criminalizing religious conversion.
Impact of anti-conversion law
The enactment of anti-conversion laws across different states has sparked debate around the authenticity of religious conversion and has largely affected the fundamental right of the individual to propagate their religion. The legislature might have enacted the law with a good intention, but its consequences can’t be ignored, as the law in some cases has gone beyond its stated purpose to prevent force and fraudulent conversion. The mandatory requirement of declaration to the district magistrate and post-conversion inquiries violates the right to privacy and freedom of conscience. Although the Supreme Court in the case of Rev. Stanislaus v.
State of Madhya Pradesh[vi] has an emphasis upon the restricted right of conversion the contemporary laws seem to overburden even voluntary religious conversion. Besides infringing upon constitutional rights, atsocial stratum it has contributed to growing suspicion around interfaith marriages, relationships, and religious gatherings. There is an increase in the FIR involving interfaith marriages, wherein the couple usually faces arrest or judicial scrutiny despite having a consensual relationship or predating the marriage. Such incidents create legal uncertainty and societal pressure upon minority communities.
Reports from various civil societies and human rights organizations show that there is a significant increase in the number of cases involving violence, harassment, or police action against minorities. An investigation conducted by Article 14 in May 2023 shows that Uttar Pradesh police have registered at least 433 cases of forced religious conversion in three years, with a conviction rate of less than 2 percent.[vii] According to the United Christian Forum, Uttar Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, and Jharkhand have reported the highest number of conversion cases.[viii] The ground-level enforcement of this law often involves nonstate actors, who are often accused of filing false complaints, thus disrupting religious harmony and creating an atmosphere of intimidation and communal tension.
Conclusion
The introduction of anti-conversion laws across different states reflects a complex interplay between state power and individual rights. Anti-conversion laws are justified on grounds such as preventing coercion or fraud, but their expanding scope, procedural requirements, and enforcement raise serious concerns. The conviction rate under these laws is negligible despite high numbers of FIRs and frequent arrests, especially in states like Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh.
Civil society reports and case studies indicate that the laws have, in practice, created a chilling effect on interfaith relationships and voluntary conversions and are frequently invoked in socially sensitive cases. The rigorous provisions of anti-conversion laws are often seen as a conflict with articles 25 and 26 of the Indian constitution, as well as the right to privacy as upheld in K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India. Socially, they appear to enable vigilantism and deepen religious polarization rather than ensure protection. As more states contemplate enacting similar legislation, there is a growing need to reassess their constitutional validity, ensure procedural safeguards, and shift from a control-based framework to one that protects both autonomy and communal harmony.
[i]Office of the Registrar General & Census Commissioner, Ministry of Home Affairs, Census of India 2011: Religion PCA (2011), https://censusindia.gov.in.
[ii]India Const. art. 25–26
[iii]Citizens for Justice & Peace v. Union of India, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 268/2020 (pending before the Supreme Court of India).
[iv]S.R. Bommai v. Union of India, (1994) 3 S.C.C. 1 (India).
[v]Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, (1973) 4 S.C.C. 225 (India).
[vi]Rev. Stainislaus v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (1977) 1 S.C.C. 677 (India).
[vii]Anirudh Suri, In 3 Years, 433 UP ‘Love Jihad’ Cases, But No Mass Conversions. Many Acquitted, Some Discharged, Article 14 (Apr. 13, 2023), https://article-14.com/post/in-3-years-433-up-love-jihad-cases-but-no-mass-conversions-many-acquitted-some-discharged–642edf3342b8c.
[viii]United Christian Forum, Persecution Watch Annual Report 2023 (Jan. 2024), https://map.efiresponse.org.
Author Name: Archana Kumari
