Maharashtra Anti-Conversion Law Challenged In Bombay High Court Over Privacy, Autonomy & Gender Discrimination Concerns

An Islamic scholar has moved Bombay High Court against Maharashtra's Freedom of Religion Act, 2026, claiming it goes beyond preventing forced or fraudulent conversions and intrudes into consensual relationships and voluntary faith choices. The petition challenges multiple provisions, including mandatory disclosure requirements and non-bailable prosecution.

Bombay High Court | file pic

Mumbai: A petition has been filed before the principal bench of the Bombay High Court challenging the constitutional validity of the Maharashtra Freedom of Religion Act, 2026, with the petitioner arguing that several provisions of the newly enacted law violate fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution.

The plea, filed by 70-year-old Islamic scholar Maulana Halimullah Farooque Ahemed Khan through advocate Mateen Shaikh, contends that while preventing forced or fraudulent marriages and religious conversions is a legitimate state objective, the law cannot extend to monitoring consensual inter-faith relationships or voluntary changes of faith, reported Bar and Bench.

According to the petition, the choice of a life partner and an individual's decision regarding their religion are protected aspects of personal autonomy, dignity, privacy and decisional freedom under Articles 21 and 25 of the Constitution.

Gender Discrimination Provision Challenged

The petitioner has specifically challenged Section 9(2), which prescribes enhanced punishment for conversion of women, arguing that the provision is discriminatory on the basis of gender.

`;

The plea has also questioned Section 2(a), which defines “allurement”, claiming that the provision is vague and overly broad. It argues that terms such as “better lifestyle” and “divine healing” could potentially cover legitimate religious discourse, charity and humanitarian activities.

The petitioner has further contended that the threat of criminal proceedings, arrest, non-bailable prosecution, mandatory disclosure of personal information and public scrutiny under the Act could deter individuals and religious organisations from engaging in lawful religious teaching, preaching and charitable work.

Mandatory Notice Requirement Questioned

Another key challenge concerns the mandatory 60-day notice required before a person changes their religion. The plea argues that such a requirement exposes an individual's personal faith choice to public scrutiny and state inquiry, thereby infringing the right to privacy.

The petition states that when a person voluntarily chooses to change their religion, the state's inquiry should be limited to determining whether the decision was free, voluntary and based on informed consent. It argues that the government cannot investigate an individual's beliefs, motivations or reasons merely because they may have been exposed to religious instruction, persuasion or lawful charitable activities.

Burden Of Proof Challenged

Section 13 has also been challenged for placing the burden of proof on the accused. According to the plea, this provision undermines procedural fairness and the constitutional presumption of innocence.

The petitioner has sought that the Maharashtra Freedom of Religion Act be declared unconstitutional. Alternatively, it has urged the High Court to read down its provisions and restrict their application strictly to cases involving actual force, fraud or coercion.

Earlier Petition Dismissed

The challenge comes days after the Nagpur Bench on August 21 dismissed a similar petition over vague pleadings. That petition had challenged the Act following its notification on July 30. While imposing costs, the bench had granted liberty to the petitioner to approach the court again after carrying out thorough research and presenting a properly framed challenge.

To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/

Add As a

Trusted Source