Maharashtra assembly passes 'anti-conversion' bill amid political uproar, opposition calls it 'unconstitutional': What next?

The legislative assembly of Maharashtra has passed the Freedom of Religion Bill 2026 on late Monday, tabled by the Mahayuti govt. The bill was supported by Sena (UBT); however, Congress, NCP (SP), Samajwadi Party and CPI (M) opposed it, demanding a joint select committee for review of suggestions/objections from the public. In the next development, the bill will be tabled in the Legislative Council on Tuesday.

What does the bill say?

According to provisions in the bill, those found guilty could face strict punishment, including imprisonment of up to seven years, along with financial penalties. Offences under the proposed law are likely to be treated as cognisable and non-bailable, giving law enforcement greater powers to act.

A key aspect of the bill is its focus on marriages linked to conversion. If a conversion is found to be forced or unlawful, the marriage can be declared invalid. The government has indicated that the legislation is intended to address complaints of coercive religious conversions and protect individuals’ freedom of belief.

However, the bill has not yet become law. It will need approval from the Legislative Council and the Governor’s assent before coming into force. The ruling alliance has maintained that the bill is about safeguarding religious freedom and ensuring transparency in conversion processes.

Fadnavis calls anti-conversion bill 'fully constitutional'

While introducing the bill in the house, Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis claimed that the bill is not against any religion, but to protect the freedom of religion for all. Outside the assembly, Sena (UBT) chief Uddhav Thackeray said that freedom of religion must be ensured for all, but his party would oppose any conversion carried out through force, exploitation of vulnerability, or misleading inducements. "We support that bill fully," Uddhav said, TOI reported.

Presenting the Bill in the Legislative Assembly on Monday, Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis said the proposed law is intended to curb religious conversions carried out through coercion, inducement, fraud or deception, and asserted that it is fully constitutional. He added that similar laws are already in place in 12 states, including Odisha, Karnataka, Haryana, Rajasthan, and Arunachal Pradesh, and said the Bill aims to bring clarity in cases of unlawful conversions.

"Cases of inter-faith marriages often give rise to law and order situations; consequently, once such a situation emerges, effective action must be taken to address it. As things stand, the currently prevailing laws—whether it be the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita or various other statutes—lack explicit provisions specifically addressing this matter. Consequently, we rely on existing provisions within these laws; for instance, we frequently invoke the provisions related to fraud in such instances," the CM said.

"If specific provisions are in place, such difficulties related to unlawful conversion or interfaith marriages do not arise. Therefore—to ensure clarity and prevent recurring issues witnessed recently, wherein groups from opposing sides confront one another and consequently trigger law and order disturbances—this Bill has been introduced. Fundamentally, as you are aware, Article 25 of the Constitution grants every individual the right to freedom of religion; our Constitution bestows upon us the right to choose and practice any religion we wish. This bill is in letter and spirit 100% in tune with the Constitution," he added.

The motion to pass the bill was introduced by Minister of State Pankaj Bhoyar and is expected to be taken up in the Legislative Council on Tuesday. Sena (UBT) MLA Bhaskar Jadhav said his party supports the legislation.

However, Congress MLA Aslam Shaikh criticised the Bill as unconstitutional, saying it infringes on the right to privacy and could push interfaith couples to extreme distress. SP MLA Rais Shaikh called it regressive, alleging it targets a particular community, while Congress MLA Amin Patel also termed it a violation of the Constitution.

Other than opposition, civil society groups have also expressed concern, arguing that such laws could be misused and may interfere with personal choices, particularly in interfaith relationships.