On Thursday, the Maharashtra Cabinet cleared the Dharma Swatantrya Adhiniyam, 2026, a Bill proposing rigorous imprisonment of up to seven years and a fine of Rs 5 lakh for unlawful religious conversions.The proposed law is the latest in a series of similar pieces of legislation enacted by BJP governments in states over the last eight years, often with the stated goal of curbing forcible conversion and marriage of Hindu women, described as “love jihad”.Since 2017, nine states have passed laws regulating religious conversion — Jharkhand (2017), Uttarakhand (2018), Himachal Pradesh (2019), Uttar Pradesh (2020), Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh (2021), Haryana and Karnataka (2022), and Rajasthan (2025). The stated objective across these statutes is to prohibit conversion by force, fraud or inducement. All of them follow a shared legal template that mandates bureaucratic permissions for changing faith and reverses the burden of proof in criminal trials for the offence of unlawful conversion.Similar legislationThe structural similarities across these laws begin with how they define the crime. The laws in Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka and Haryana define “allurement” to convert to include not just cash or employment but also intangible benefits such as a “better lifestyle” or “divine pleasure”. The Rajasthan law expands this to the digital realm, criminalising conversion through “online solicitation” and the dissemination of “propaganda” via social media.A distinct feature of the laws in Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Haryana and Rajasthan is the specific criminalisation of conversion for the purpose of marriage. These statutes declare any marriage performed for conversion as void.Also Read | Cases under Uttarakhand’s conversion law fall in court: 7 years, 5 full trials, all 5 acquittalsThese laws also create the requirement for state sanction before an individual can change their faith. In Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh, individuals seeking to convert must submit a declaration to the district magistrate (DM) at least 30 days in advance.Story continues below this adThis timeline has been extended in subsequent legislation. The laws in Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Haryana and Karnataka mandate a 60-day notice to the DM while Rajasthan’s Act requires a declaration 90 days in advance. In most of these states, the DM is empowered to conduct a police inquiry to ascertain the “intention” behind the conversion. Failure to provide this information may invite criminal liability for the religious priest conducting the ceremony and for the individual converting.These laws flip the general principle of criminal justice — innocent until proven guilty — by placing the burden of proof on the accused. They do this by mandating that the person charged with causing or facilitating illegal conversion must prove to court that the conversion was not effected through misrepresentation, force, coercion or allurement.Tougher, steeper penalties | How Rajasthan’s anti-conversion Bill differs from earlier version tabled by GovtThe quantum of punishment has also seen a sharp upward trajectory over the years. While the Jharkhand law of 2017 prescribed imprisonment of up to three years, the Uttar Pradesh law, following a 2024 amendment, allows for imprisonment up to 14 years in cases involving minors, women or Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes or in cases of “mass conversion”. The Rajasthan law prescribes rigorous imprisonment of up to 20 years for such offences.Across all states, the offence of unlawful conversion is cognisable — allowing police to arrest without a warrant — and non-bailable.Judicial pushbackStory continues below this adIn August 2021, the Gujarat High Court stayed sections of the state’s amended anti-conversion law that assumed religious conversions for marriage were fraudulent or forced. The court’s rationale was “to protect the parties solemnising marriage inter-faith from being unnecessarily harassed”.Also Read | Why Allahabad HC ruled UP’s anti-conversion law does not bar interfaith live-in relationshipsIn November 2022, the Madhya Pradesh High Court struck down Section 10 of the state’s Freedom of Religion Act, which required individuals to give a 60-day prior declaration to the DM before converting. The court held that compelling a citizen to disclose their intimate religious choices to the government violated the fundamental right to privacy.In Karnataka, the High Court in July last year quashed an FIR under the state’s anti-conversion law against individuals distributing pamphlets about Islam. The court noted that the mere distribution of literature does not constitute an offence under the 2022 Act.Challenge in the Supreme CourtPetitions challenging the Constitutional validity of these laws have been pending before the Supreme Court since 2020. In September 2025, the apex court transferred petitions challenging these laws pending before different High Courts to itself and tagged them all together.Story continues below this adThe petitioners — the Citizens for Justice and Peace, the People’s Union for Civil Liberties, the Jamiat-Ulama-i-Hind, the Catholic Bishops Conference of India, the National Council of Churches in India and some individual citizens — have challenged the statutes enacted by these states on the grounds that these statutes are vague, overbroad and grant excessive discretion to the police, leading to harassment of inter-faith couples and minority communities.They contend that the laws violate the fundamental rights to life and personal liberty and to freedom of religion guaranteed by the Constitution by subjecting personal choices to state scrutiny.