New Delhi: Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis has defended the proposed Maharashtra Freedom of Religion Bill, 2026, saying the legislation is intended to prevent fraudulent religious conversions and protect individuals from coercion, inducement and deception.
Speaking about the bill introduced in the Maharashtra Assembly, Fadnavis said the law was prompted by cases where women were allegedly lured into relationships, married and later abandoned, leaving them and their children facing serious social and legal difficulties. He said the proposed legislation seeks to address such situations by closing legal loopholes that could be misused.
According to the Chief Minister, the bill is not directed against any community and does not interfere with genuine personal choices regarding religion. He maintained that the objective is to curb forced or fraudulent conversions rather than restrict voluntary religious practices.
Under the proposed law, any individual or organisation intending to convert a person from one religion to another must submit a notice to authorities at least 60 days in advance. The information would then be made public to allow objections to be raised. The bill also permits relatives to file complaints if they suspect an unlawful conversion, and police would be required to register such cases.
The legislation proposes penalties of up to seven years in prison along with financial penalties for those found guilty of unlawful conversions. Stricter fines are suggested in cases involving women, minors, or members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.
Fadnavis criticised opposition parties for politicising the issue and insisted that a careful reading of the bill would clarify its intent. He said the legislation focuses on preventing coercion and exploitation rather than targeting any faith or community.
Several Indian states, including Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka, and Uttarakhand, have already enacted similar laws regulating religious conversions.
However, opposition leaders and civil society groups have expressed concerns that some provisions could affect individual freedoms and constitutional rights. Despite the criticism, the state government has maintained that the bill’s primary purpose is to prevent coercion and fraud while safeguarding the freedom of religion.
