A law that could criminalise compassion (Op-ed by Frazer Mascarenhas)

Why in the News

A former Mumbai college principal has criticised Maharashtra’s new Freedom of Religion Act, commonly called the anti-conversion law, arguing it makes the offence non-bailable and places the burden of proving innocence on the accused, provisions the writer compares to the anti-terror Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). The piece argues the law threatens not only an individual’s freedom to choose a religion but also humanitarian activities, including education, healthcare and social services, run by religious institutions for disadvantaged communities.

What does the new Maharashtra law provide, and why does the writer call it disproportionate?

1. A reversed burden of proof: The law makes the offence of unlawful conversion non-bailable and places the onus on the accused to prove innocence, a standard the writer likens to the UAPA, rather than the ordinary criminal law principle that the prosecution must prove guilt.
2. No demonstrated evidence of large-scale forced conversion: The writer states that no data has been provided anywhere in the country establishing large-scale conversions by force, fraud or inducement, the harm the law is intended to address.
3. Existing criminal law already covers illegal conversion: The writer notes the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 can already address criminal acts of conversion carried out through illegal means, without a separate non-bailable, reverse-onus law.
4. Third-party complaints and an undefined “inducement”: Accusations under the law can be filed by third parties or family members, and the law does not clearly define “inducement,” which the writer argues could bring ordinary educational, medical or social services within its scope.

What activities does the writer say the law could criminalise?

1. Education, healthcare and welfare run by religious institutions: The writer cites decades of Catholic Church-run education, certified by bodies such as the University Grants Commission (UGC), medical facilities and social services extended without religious restriction, and financial aid to students and patients regardless of faith.
2. Inter-religious marriages: The writer notes 30 to 40 percent of marriages recorded by the Catholic Church in parts of the country are inter-religious and do not require the non-Catholic partner to convert; the new law’s requirement of a public declaration weeks before such a marriage could invite false allegations of attempted conversion.
3. Prayer and healing practices: The writer describes prayers for healing, including the practice of laying hands on a person in need, as normal Christian worship that the new law could bring under suspicion if extended to people of other faiths who request it.

Challenges in India’s anti-conversion legal framework

1. Absence of a safeguard against false complaints: The law does not penalise complainants whose allegations are later found false, allowing accusers to act without consequence. Eg. The writer notes attacks by non-state actors on prayer meetings in private halls or homes, after which police have filed FIRs mainly against the persons attacked rather than the attackers. Fix. Insert a provision imposing penalties, including a jail term, on complainants whose allegations are established as false, to deter misuse of the reverse-onus provision.
2. Reverse onus enabling prolonged pre-trial detention: Making the offence non-bailable while shifting the burden of proof to the accused risks turning the judicial process itself into the punishment. Eg. The writer draws a parallel with the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), under which persons have allegedly remained in jail for years without anything being proved against them. Fix. Restore the ordinary bail standard and the prosecution’s burden of proof for conversion offences that do not involve demonstrated force or fraud.

Conclusion

The writer argues that Maharashtra’s anti-conversion law, by combining a non-bailable offence with a reversed burden of proof and an undefined threshold for inducement, risks criminalising ordinary humanitarian and educational work as well as inter-religious marriage, without any demonstrated evidence of the large-scale forced conversion the law claims to address.

What is Article 25 of the Constitution?

1. Freedom of conscience and religion: Article 25 guarantees all persons freedom of conscience and the right to freely profess, practise and propagate religion, subject to public order, morality, health and other fundamental rights.
2. Subject to state regulation: The Article allows the state to regulate secular activities associated with religious practice and to provide for social welfare and reform, the constitutional basis states cite when enacting anti-conversion legislation.

Matching Previous Year Question

PrelimsPYQ.csv: match found on Article 25 (Universal Declaration of Human Rights context) — “(c) Article 25” (2011, Microtheme: Fundamental Rights and Duties, Subject: Polity), a related but not squarely on-point conceptual match; cited as the closest available.