New Rajasthan Bill Creates Unequal Rules for Religious Conversion
Converts to Majority Faith Protected, Others Face Criminal Charges, Property Loss
September 10, 2025
The Rajasthan Assembly passed the Rajasthan Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Bill, 2025, on Sept. 9. One of its most troubling features is how it redefines religious conversion, saying that returning to one’s “ancestral religion” is not considered a conversion at all. This definition, also found in similar laws in other states, creates an uneven legal standard that protects some religious identities while exposing others to state scrutiny, criminal charges and harsh punishment.
The Bill states that conversion is not deemed to have taken place if a person adopts the religion of their ancestors, as reported by The Print. There is no objective method prescribed to determine what counts as an ancestral religion, how far back one’s religious lineage must be traced or whether those ancestors chose their religion voluntarily. This gives wide discretionary power to authorities to define which conversions fall under the scope of the law and which do not.
This violates the constitutional principle of neutrality in state regulation of religion. This unequal treatment shows how the law is being used as a tool to serve certain political or communal goals, rather than being applied fairly to everyone. In this case, the law creates a protected pathway for those converting into the dominant religion, while subjecting conversions out of it to state intervention. This undermines both religious freedom and equality before the law.
The Bill effectively recognises a hierarchical framework of religions, with ancestral faith, read here as the dominant local religion, granted a superior legal status. This goes against the secular foundation of the Indian Constitution, which guarantees the right to freely profess, practise and propagate religion without discrimination or state preference.
The Bill also reverses the burden of proof by requiring the person who has changed religion, and anyone who assisted them, to prove that the conversion was not a result of misrepresentation, coercion, allurement, propaganda, marriage, or even online communication. These categories are vaguely defined and open to expansive interpretation. This change breaks the principle of procedural fairness, which requires the accuser to bear the burden of proof.
The law appears to be written to look like a normal legal measure, but it may lead to political control. It does not seem aimed at punishing specific acts of coercion. Instead, it could allow the state to monitor and penalise people for their personal beliefs and choices.
The Bill further extends the right to file complaints to “any person,” removing the need for the aggrieved party or their family to initiate action. This empowers ideologically driven groups to interfere in private matters of belief. It also creates fertile ground for misuse, particularly in communal contexts.
The law grants complete immunity to officials and complainants acting “in good faith.” This removes the possibility of redress for those falsely accused or victimised through misuse of the law. It runs counter to the idea of accountable governance, in which state actors must be held responsible for the exercise of their powers. The concept of “good faith” is not defined, and no independent mechanism is provided to test it.
Another alarming provision in the Bill is the authorisation of demolitions. Properties where mass conversions are alleged to have taken place through unlawful means may be razed after an inquiry conducted by a gazetted officer. There is no requirement for a court conviction.
The Bill allows demolition of structures even when the owners were not involved in, or even aware of, the alleged activity. This use of executive action without judicial oversight violates the principle of natural justice, and introduces an extra-legal form of punishment now embedded in formal law.
Further, the law allows the seizure of property used for conversion, even if the owner was unaware. The scope of institutions covered by this provision includes schools, orphanages, hospitals and NGOs. These institutions are especially important to marginalised communities. By threatening them with demolition or seizure, the state appears to be seeking to use regulatory power as an instrument of ideological discipline.
The Bill also empowers courts to annul marriages that are found to have been performed for the purpose of religious conversion. It does not require either spouse to complain. This introduces state scrutiny into the domain of intimate relationships, making personal unions contingent upon ideological conformity. The application of this law to marriages reflects a patriarchal and communal logic that has long been part of political rhetoric around “love jihad.”
The inclusion of “propaganda” as a criminal category adds another layer of ambiguity. The Bill defines it as the systematic dissemination of information or beliefs through any media. This subjects religious expression and digital communication to the risk of criminal prosecution.
The penalties themselves are extraordinarily harsh.
For general cases of unlawful conversion, the punishment ranges from seven to fourteen years, with a minimum fine of 500,000 (5 lakh) rupees. If the person converted is a woman, minor, disabled person, or from a Scheduled Caste or Tribe, the sentence increases to 10 to 20 years, with a fine of at least one million (10 lakh) rupees. Mass conversion attracts life imprisonment.
In combination, these provisions construct a legal environment in which all conversion is presumed fraudulent unless proved otherwise, and where only conversions into dominant religious identities are exempt.
If this Bill becomes law, it will create two sets of rules for religious freedom. The state will be able to decide which conversions are acceptable and which are not, depending on the religion involved.
You have just read a News Briefing by Newsreel Asia, written to cut through the noise and present a single story for the day that matters to you. Certain briefings, based on media reports, seek to keep readers informed about events across India, others offer a perspective rooted in humanitarian concerns and some provide our own exclusive reporting. We encourage you to read the News Briefing each day. Our objective is to help you become not just an informed citizen, but an engaged and responsible one.
