News Analysis India

Tag: religious conversions

  • Madhya Pradesh Freedom of Religion Bill, 2021 passed in Assembly

    Express News Service
    BHOPAL: The Madhya Pradesh Assembly on Monday passed the ‘anti-Love Jihad’ Freedom of Religion Bill, 2021.

    The Bill had been approved earlier in December 2020 by the state Cabinet in a special meeting chaired by Chief Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan.

    After BJP-ruled Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand, Madhya Pradesh becomes the third state to pass the law.

    The passed legislation has the provision of up to 10 years in jail and a fine of up to Rs 1 lakh as punishment for religious conversion through coercion, force, allurement and fraudulent means and misrepresentation, including marriages solemnized through fraudulent means.

    The state’s home minister Narottam Mishra, while replying to the debate before passing of the Bill by voice vote informed that a total of 23 cases were lodged under the law which was first cleared as an Ordinance in January 2021.

    While the Narendra Modi-led central government had last year informed the Parliament that no cases of ‘Love Jihad’ were reported by any central agency, the state’s home minister said, “hum love ke khilaf nahin hain, hum Jihad ke khilaf hain. (We are not against Love, but are against Jihad).

    Mishra added, “We are vehemently against all such love which hurts our sentiments and leaves our sisters and daughters in agony”. 

    Opposing the Bill, former parliamentary affairs minister and senior Congress MLA Dr Govind Singh said there was no need for any such Bill, as existing laws, including the Indian Penal Code and the Criminal Procedure Code have sufficient provisions against forced and fraudulent religious conversions. “This Bill was passed in MP after the passage of bills on similar lines by UP and Uttarakhand, to ensure that our home minister can win plaudits from union home minister Amit Shah”.

    The Congress veteran further alleged that the Bill also violates the spirit of Articles 21 and 25 of the Indian Constitution which guarantee individuals personal freedom and also freedom of choosing the religion at one’s own will.”

    The state Assembly’s former Deputy Speaker and Congress MLA from Lanji (Balaghat) Heena Kanware also questioned the need for such a Bill, when the MP Freedom of Religion Act 1968 already existed. “Has any survey been conducted in the state for understanding the need for such a Bill”.

  • SC agrees to examine validity of state laws on religious conversions due to interfaith marriage

    By PTI
    NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court Wednesday agreed to examine controversial new laws of Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand regulating religious conversions due to inter-faith marriages.

    A bench headed by Chief Justice SA Bobde refused, however, to stay the controversial provisions of the laws and issued notices to both state governments on two different petitions.

    The pleas, filed by advocate Vishal Thakre and others and an NGO ‘Citizen for Justice and Peace’, have challenged the constitutional validity of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Religious Conversion Ordinance, 2020 and the Uttarakhand Freedom of Religion Act, 2018 which regulate religious conversions of inter-faith marriages.

    At the outset, the top court asked the petitioners to approach the Allahabad High Court after Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said that it is already seized of the matter.

    ​ALSO READ | Interfaith marriage: Uttarakhand HC asks Haridwar admin for protection to couple

    The bench said that this is not the transfer petition where it can transfer to itself all the cases on the law after one of the petitioner said that the issue should be examined by the top court.

    Senior advocate C U Singh, appearing for the NGO, referred to the judgement of Justice (retd) Deepak Gupta and says that similar laws are being made in various states.

    He sought stay of the provisions of the law and said that people are being in the middle of wedding ceremonies.

    Singh added that some of the provisions of these laws are oppressive and horrible in nature and requires prior consent of government to marry which is absolutely obnoxious.

    The bench said that it is issuing notice and sought response from both the state governments within four weeks.

    When Singh insisted for stay of provisions, the CJI said that now stay is sought on some provisions without hearing the states.

    “How can it be done?” the bench said.