The Maharashtra Legislative Council approved the Maharashtra Freedom of Religion Bill, 2026, despite concerns raised by opposition and ruling members regarding potential misuse of its provisions. The Bill aims to prohibit illegal religious conversions conducted through force, coercion, allurement, misrepresentation, or other deceitful methods. The Congress and the Nationalist Congress Party opposed the Bill, while the Shiv Sena supported it, with the Council passing it a day after the Legislative Assembly’s approval.
Minister of State for Home Pankaj Bhoyar clarified during the debate that the Bill does not intend to restrict a person’s right to convert or limit a woman’s freedom but is focused on preventing forced conversions. He emphasized that the legislation is not directed at any specific religion and will be applicable to all. The opposition, led by Congress MLC Bhai Jagtap, questioned the necessity of the Bill, expressing concerns that it might unfairly target certain communities and undermine the constitutional framework.
BJP MLC Parinay Phuke defended the Bill, stating that its purpose is to safeguard Hindus and prevent demographic shifts. He argued that laws like these are essential to protect the Hindu population, especially in light of population pressures faced by Europe from countries like Pakistan, Iran, and Afghanistan. The Bill, according to him, was introduced by the Maharashtra government with a pro-Hindu stance. Despite the Shiv Sena’s support for the Bill, some of its legislators sought further details on the incidents prompting its introduction and actions taken previously.
Minister Bhoyar mentioned that a committee, headed by the DGP, extensively examined the issue before drafting the Bill, although he did not specify the exact number of cases that led to its formulation. He highlighted the absence of a dedicated law to address conversions specifically, emphasizing the need for this legislation. Independent MLC Satyajeet Tambe, while supporting the Bill, cautioned against negative impacts on youth or their freedom to choose partners. He raised concerns about the 60-day notice requirement before conversion ceremonies and suggested changes regarding the religion assignment of children born in disputed marriages.
The Bill mandates that individuals intending to convert, as well as organizers of conversion ceremonies, must provide a 60-day advance notice to the district magistrate or an authorized officer. Details of the proposed conversion will be publicly displayed, inviting objections within 30 days. The converted person and the organizer are required to submit a declaration within 21 days post-ceremony. The legislation places the burden of proof on those involved in the conversion process, with stringent administrative requirements and criminal penalties proposed to deter illegal conversions.
