The Rajasthan Legislative Assembly recently achieved a significant milestone by successfully enacting the Rajasthan Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Bill, 2025. This comprehensive legislation represents the state's renewed attempt to address concerns surrounding religious conversions that allegedly involve coercive practices. The bill's passage marks a decisive moment in the ongoing national discourse about religious freedom versus protection from exploitation.
The legislative session witnessed considerable political tension as opposition Congress Members of the Legislative Assembly (MLAs) chose to abstain from participating in the parliamentary debate. Their decision to stage a walkout was accompanied by strong objections, with Congress representatives expressing concerns that this new legal framework could potentially disrupt the delicate fabric of communal relations and generate social unrest within the state's diverse population.
Comprehensive Legal Framework and Severe Penalties
The newly enacted legislation establishes an exceptionally robust legal framework designed to combat religious conversions accomplished through illegitimate means. The bill specifically targets conversions carried out through force, fraudulent practices, material allurements, or psychological coercion. The punishment structure reflects the legislature's serious commitment to addressing these issues with penalties ranging up to life imprisonment for the most severe violations.
The financial penalties accompanying criminal sanctions are equally substantial with fines potentially reaching ₹1 crore (10 million rupees). This significant monetary punishment serves both as a deterrent and as a mechanism for victim compensation, as the legislation mandates that collected fines be distributed to those who suffered from unlawful conversion attempts.
Historical Context and Previous Legislative Attempts
Rajasthan's current anti-conversion legislation represents the culmination of nearly two decades of legislative efforts. The state's first serious attempt to enact such legislation occurred in 2006 under Chief Minister Vasundhara Raje's administration. However, this initial effort encountered significant obstacles when then-President Pratibha Patil declined to provide presidential assent to the proposed law.
The 2006 bill faced substantial opposition from multiple quarters, including the Congress party, various human rights organizations, and minority community representatives. These groups raised concerns about potential violations of constitutional rights and the legislation's potential impact on religious minorities.
Continued Legal Challenges and Amendments
Following the presidential rejection, the Rajasthan government attempted to address the concerns raised by critics through legislative amendments. An updated version of the bill was submitted to the central government in 2008, but this revised legislation also failed to progress through the approval process, remaining indefinitely stalled with federal authorities.
Minister of State for Home Affairs Jawahar Singh Bedham articulated the government's position during the assembly session, arguing that the legislation would contribute to maintaining social peace and harmony. Bedham emphasized that while the bill respects individual religious freedom as guaranteed by Article 25 of the Indian Constitution, it specifically targets conversions accomplished through deceptive, intimidating, or fraudulent means.
The minister's statements reflect the government's attempt to balance constitutional protections for religious freedom with the need to protect vulnerable populations from exploitation. Bedham argued that the legislation particularly safeguards marginalized communities, including Dalits, economically disadvantaged groups, women, and persons with disabilities, who may be more susceptible to coercive conversion tactics.
Constitutional Framework and Supreme Court Precedents
The government's legal justification draws heavily on existing Supreme Court precedents that have declared forced religious conversions unconstitutional and illegal. By referencing these established judicial decisions, the state government argues that the new legislation simply codifies and strengthens existing legal principles rather than creating entirely new restrictions on religious freedom.
This constitutional argument attempts to address critics' concerns by positioning the legislation as consistent with established judicial interpretations of religious liberty rather than as a novel restriction on fundamental rights. One of the most significant aspects of the new legislation is its specific exemption for individuals returning to what the law defines as their "ancestral religion." This provision allows people to convert to religions that their ancestors practiced without falling under the bill's stringent requirements and penalties.
This exemption has generated considerable debate, as critics argue it creates a discriminatory framework that treats different types of religious conversions unequally. Supporters contend that the provision recognizes the legitimate desire of individuals to reconnect with their historical religious traditions.
Broader National Context and Similar Legislation
Rajasthan's adoption of anti-conversion legislation places it within a growing coalition of Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-governed states that have enacted similar laws. States including Uttar Pradesh, Haryana, Uttarakhand, Arunachal Pradesh, and Andhra Pradesh have previously implemented comparable legal frameworks designed to prevent allegedly coercive religious conversions.
This pattern suggests a coordinated approach among BJP-led state governments to address what they characterize as organized efforts to convert individuals through improper means. The similarity of these laws across multiple states indicates a shared political and legal philosophy regarding the regulation of religious conversion activities.
Recent Incidents and Enforcement Context: Mass Conversion Incidents
The legislation's passage was influenced by several high-profile incidents that allegedly involved mass conversion activities within Rajasthan. In February 2024, reports emerged of a significant mass conversion event at Sonar Haveli in Atalband, Bharatpur district, which generated considerable public controversy and media attention.
More recently, law enforcement authorities arrested preacher Bajinder Singh, who operates under the religious name "Yeshu Yeshu Baba," on charges related to allegedly using improper inducements to encourage religious conversions. Singh's case has attracted additional attention because he faces similar charges in Punjab and is currently detained in Mansa jail on separate rape charges, highlighting the complex intersection of religious conversion allegations with other criminal activities.
These specific incidents provided concrete examples that legislators could reference when justifying the need for comprehensive anti-conversion legislation, moving the debate beyond abstract legal principles to documented cases of alleged abuse.
Legal Process and Court Jurisdiction: Enhanced Judicial Framework
The new legislation establishes specific procedural requirements for prosecuting conversion-related offenses. All violations under the bill are classified as cognizable offenses, meaning police can arrest suspects without requiring a judicial warrant. Additionally, these offenses are designated as non-bailable, requiring individuals accused of unlawful conversion activities to remain in custody unless specifically granted bail by a court.
The passage of Rajasthan's anti-conversion legislation represents a significant development in the ongoing national conversation about religious freedom, minority rights, and protection against exploitation. While supporters argue that the law provides necessary safeguards for vulnerable populations, critics maintain that it may inadvertently restrict legitimate religious expression and create an atmosphere of suspicion around religious minorities.
The legislation's ultimate impact will depend largely on how it is implemented and enforced by state authorities, as well as how it withstands potential constitutional challenges in higher courts. As Rajasthan joins other BJP-governed states in adopting similar legal frameworks, the national debate over balancing religious freedom with protection against coercion is likely to intensify, potentially leading to final Supreme Court guidance on these complex constitutional questions.
. . .
References: