About Uttar Pradesh Anti-Conversion Law
UPSC Notes: Uttar Pradesh’s Anti-Conversion Law Made More Stringent
Context:
The Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly recently amended the 2021 anti-conversion law, introducing more stringent provisions to curb alleged unlawful religious conversions.
Aim of the Amendments:
- To prevent “organized and well-planned” conversions allegedly influenced by “foreign and anti-national elements.”
- To address concerns over demographic changes due to forced or fraudulent conversions.
- Strengthens legal provisions, with 427 cases registered under the original Act between January 2021 and April 2023.
Key Amendments Introduced:
| Amendment Area | Previous Provisions | New Provisions |
|---|---|---|
| Increased Penalties | 1 to 5 years in prison + ₹15,000 fine | 5 to 10 years in prison + ₹50,000 fine |
| For minors, women, SC/ST: Higher penalties | 5 to 14 years in prison + ₹1 lakh fine | |
|
New Offenses |
Not specified | Illegal foreign funds: 7 to 14 years + ₹10 lakh fine |
| Forced conversion via threats/violence: 20 years to life imprisonment
|
||
| Complaint Filing | Only aggrieved person or close relatives could file | Any person can file a complaint |
| Bail Provisions | Offenses were bailable | All offenses are now cognizable and non-bailable |
| Standard bail conditions | Twin conditions: Prosecutor’s input + court’s satisfaction required |
Comparison of Anti-Conversion Laws Across States:
| Parameter | Uttar Pradesh | Other States |
|---|---|---|
| States Covered | Uttar Pradesh | Odisha, MP, Arunachal Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Uttarakhand |
| Notification Requirements | 60 days + police inquiry | MP: 60 days, Himachal & Uttarakhand: 30 days |
| Complaint Filing | Any person can file an FIR | Only aggrieved person or family |
| Bail Conditions | Strict | Less stringent |
| Penalties | 5 years to life | 2 to 10 years |
Key Constitutional Provisions Related to Religious Conversions:
| Article | Details |
|---|---|
| Article 25 | Guarantees freedom of conscience, religion, and propagation, subject to public order, morality, and health. Allows regulation of secular religious activities. |
| Article 26 | Grants religious denominations the right to manage their affairs, subject to public order, morality, and health. |
| Articles 27-30 | Guarantee religious freedoms, including establishing and managing educational institutions and financial contributions to religion. |
Supreme Court’s Interpretation of Religious Conversions:
- Rev. Stainislaus vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (1977): Article 25(1) allows spreading religion but not forced conversions.
- Sarla Mudgal vs. Union of India (1995) & Lilly Thomas vs. Union of India (2000): Conversions for polygamy are invalid.
- M Chandra vs. M Thangamuthu & Another (2010): Evidence of conversion and acceptance into the new community is required.
- Graham Staines Case (2011): Conversions through force or incitement are illegal.
- Right to Privacy Case (2017): Freedom of religion is upheld, but state interference must be proportionate.
- Note: No definitive ruling on the scope of “propagate” under Article 25.
About Anti-Conversion Laws in India:
- Definition: Aimed at preventing forced, fraudulent, or induced conversions.
- Historical Context: Pre-Independence laws restricted conversions; post-Independence, central attempts at anti-conversion laws failed.
- State-Level Laws: Enacted in Odisha, MP, Gujarat, etc., often requiring prior notification and prohibiting forceful conversions.
- Centre’s Stand: Affirms that freedom of religion does not include coercive conversions, but no national law exists.
- Challenges:
- Constitutional concerns.
- Burden of proof on accused.
- Impact on interfaith marriages.
- Potential misuse and targeting of minorities.
- Way Forward:
- Define key terms clearly.
- Uphold presumption of innocence.
- Standardize legal regulations.
- Consider a national framework.
- Encourage interfaith dialogue.