Maharashtra's Freedom of Religion Act 2026 imposes state-mandated prior approval and penal consequences on voluntary religious conversion, thereby violating Articles 21 and 25 of the Constitution.
Aaj ki debate ka motion hai: 'Maharashtra's Freedom of Religion Act 2026 Unconstitutionally Restricts Individual Right to Convert' — yani kya yeh state kanoon ek naagrik ke dharm parivartan ke adhikar par asanvaidhanik rok lagata hai? Yeh ek mahatvapurn samvidhanik sawaal hai, aur main chahti hoon ki dono paksh is par apne tarkpurn vichar rakhen. Pehle, Counsel Aarav, aap apna paksh prastut kijiye.
My lord, main yeh sthapit karna chahta hoon ki Maharashtra's Freedom of Religion Act 2026 ek vyakti ke apni marzi se dharm parivartan karne ke maulik adhikar par asanvaidhanik pratibandh lagata hai — kyunki yeh Act 'allurement' aur 'inducement' jaisi atyadhik vistrit paribhashaaon ke sahare us swatantra ichchha-shakti ko bhi apraadh banata hai jo ek praaptvayask naagrik ka svabhavik adhikar hai. Madhya Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act, 2021 ke Section 3(4)(a) ko dekhen — wahan 'misrepresentation, allurement, undue influence, coercion ya fraudulent means' se parivartan rok-e gaye hain, jo ek legitimate regulatory floor hai, lekin Maharashtra ka 2026 Act is seema ko paar karke practically har voluntary conversion ko bhi prior-declaration aur State permission ke daayare mein le aata hai. Jab State apni legislative shakti ka istemal karke ek naagrik ki aatma ki svachchha ichchha ko bhi bureaucratic maze mein daal de, tab woh Act Constitution ke Article 25 — Freedom of Conscience — ke saath seedha takraata hai.
Ref: Madhya Pradesh Freedom of Religon Act, 2021 · Section 3-4
My lord, main yahan vipaksh ki taraf se kehna chahti hoon ki Maharashtra's Freedom of Religion Act 2026 koi unconstitutional restriction nahi hai — yeh Act sirf un conversions ko rokta hai jo misrepresentation, allurement, force, ya fraud ke zariye karvaye jaate hain, aur isi tarah Himachal Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act 2019 ka Section 3 bhi kehta hai ki misrepresentation, force, fraud, undue influence, coercion, ya inducement se hua conversion — prohibition ke yogya hai. My lord, yeh kisi ke swechhik (voluntary) dharm parivartan par rok nahi hai — yeh un unfair means par rok hai jo individual ki actual freedom ko hi khatam kar dete hain.
Ref: Himachal Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act, 2019 · Section 3
My lord, vipaksh kehta hai ki yeh Act individual freedom ko restrict karta hai — lekin main samjhata hoon ki A4, yaani MP Freedom of Religion Act 2021 ka Section 3(1)(a), sirf misrepresentation, allurement, force, aur fraudulent means se ki gayi conversion ko rok ta hai, na ki genuine, voluntary conversion ko. Ek vyakti ki sachchi irada se apna dharm badalne ka adhikar is Act ke under poori tarah surakshit hai — sirf exploitation ke zariye ki gayi conversion par rok hai. Yeh restriction individual right ka hanan nahi, balki uski raksha hai — kyunki jab tak coercion ya fraud nahi, koi bhi sarkari dakhal nahi hota.
Ref: Madhya Pradesh Freedom of Religon Act, 2021 · Section 3-4
My Lord, paksh yeh maanta hai ki sirf 'misrepresentation' aur 'force' par rok lagayi gayi hai — lekin main samajhti hoon ki yeh argument incomplete hai. HP Freedom of Religion Act, 2019 ka Section 3 saaf kehta hai ki 'inducement' aur 'marriage' bhi prohibited grounds hain — aur jab 'marriage' ko ek separate ground bana diya jaaye conversion rok ne ka, toh yeh directly personal choice aur conscience ki freedom ko chhinta hai, na ki sirf fraud ko. Isliye yeh Act individual ke convert hone ke haq ko nahi, balki uske bahane ko rok raha hai — aur yahi unconstitutionality ka asal sawal hai jo paksh answer karne se bhaag raha hai.
Ref: Himachal Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act, 2019 · Section 3
Petitioner ki taraf se yeh dali gayi hai ki Maharashtra Freedom of Religion Act 2026 individual ke conscience aur conversion ke adhikar par unconstitutional rok lagata hai — jabki Respondent ka kehna hai ki yeh Act sirf force, fraud aur allurement se hone wale unlawful conversions ko rokta hai, genuine dharmik swatantrata ko nahi. Dono pakshon ki dalelein sunte hue, main yeh balanced legal suggestion deti hoon: legislature ko chahiye ki Act mein 'allurement' aur 'inducement' jaise broad terms ko precisely define kiya jaaye taaki genuine voluntary conversion protected rahe, aur District Magistrate se prior permission ka provision jaise Gujarat Act mein hai, uski judicial review ki guarantee bhi Act mein spashtata se darz ho — warna yeh provision dhara 25 aur 19(1)(a) ke saaye mein challenge ki zyada possibilities kholta hai. Yeh ek legal awareness debate tha — koi ek side na jeeti hai, na haari; ab aap citizens in dalelون ko rate karein aur apni raay dijiye.
Ref: Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act, 2003 · Section 5; Madhya Pradesh Freedom of Religon Act, 2021 · Section 3-4