The Joint Civil Society on Monday (24 August 2026) opposed the Maharashtra Freedom of Religion Act, 2026, calling it a serious threat to Constitutional freedoms, privacy and social harmony, days before the Act is set to come into force on August 28, 2026.

In a statement, the group said provisions requiring prior notice, declarations, reporting and police scrutiny of religious conversions could subject matters of faith, marriage and personal choice to intrusive State oversight.

The group also cited the recent invocation of the Act by Pune police in two FIRs before the law was due to come into force. Police subsequently removed the provisions after the State government notified August 28 as the commencement date.

The Joint Civil Society said its main concerns included third-party complaints, reversal of the burden of proof, cognisable and non-bailable offences, and the broad definition of “allurement”, which it said could place legitimate charitable, educational and religious activities under scrutiny.

The coalition also argued that the Act disproportionately affects women, young adults, Dalits and Adivasis by restricting their autonomy in matters of faith and relationships. It said mandatory disclosures and police inquiries were difficult to reconcile with Constitutional protections of religious freedom, privacy, dignity and personal liberty.

The group also cited the recent invocation of the Act by Pune police in two FIRs before the law was due to come into force. Police subsequently removed the provisions after the State government notified August 28 as the commencement date.

The Joint Civil Society said its main concerns included third-party complaints, reversal of the burden of proof, cognizable and non-bailable offences, and the broad definition of “allurement”, which it said could place legitimate charitable, educational and religious activities under scrutiny.

The coalition also argued that the Act disproportionately affects women, young adults, Dalits and Adivasis by restricting their autonomy in matters of faith and relationships. It said mandatory disclosures and police inquiries were difficult to reconcile with Constitutional protections of religious freedom, privacy, dignity and personal liberty.

Advocate Irfan Engineer, advocate Lara Jesani, Tushar Gandhi, retired Justice Abhay Thipsay, Father Frazer Mascarenhas and Sandhya Gokhale spoke against the Act.

Father Frazer Mascheranus questioned whether free or affordable education and religious healing services could be construed as ‘allurement’ under the law.“How can education be considered inducement to convert?” he asked, warning that the provisions could affect religious organisations as well as the communities they serve.

“The law is such that anyone can make an allegation, but I have to prove it. Healing services are a part of the practices of the Christian religion. How are we going to prove that we have not used inducement? This is not just an attack on religious organisations, but on the poor people,” he said.

Sandhya Gokhale said the law undermined the autonomy of consenting adults, particularly women, in choosing their faith and relationships. “Earlier, the government had released a government resolution on inter-caste/inter-religion, and police would go to homes to check whether this was happening. They couldn’t find anyone, and now they have this law. They don’t think of women as human or equal, but as objects. If we really want religious freedom, I think the child should have no religion when they are born, and once they reach the age of 18, they can decide for themselves what religion they want to accept. How can the government decide whose child belongs to which religion?” Ms. Gokhale said.

The coalition also pointed to the Constitutional challenge that is pending before the Supreme Court against similar anti-conversion laws in other States. It said provisions relating to prior declarations, police inquiries, third-party complaints, marriage-related offences and reversal of the burden of proof raised similar concerns about individual autonomy.

The group further warned that the law could deepen communal divisions by reinforcing unsubstantiated narratives around ‘love jihad’, stigmatise interfaith relationships and enable vigilante interference in private lives. It claimed that Christian organisations had already faced around 30 incidents of harassment and attacks in the greater Mumbai region over the past eight months.

The Joint Civil Society has demanded that the August 28 implementation be withdrawn or, at minimum, kept on hold pending the Supreme Court’s consideration of similar anti-conversion laws.

The coalition includes civil liberties, women’s rights, minority rights, religious and other civil society organisations.

The organisations that are a part of the Joint Civil Society are the People’s Union for Civil Liberties, Mumbai For Peace, Association for Protection of Civil Rights, Maharashtra Stree Mukti Parishad, Centre for Study of Society and Secularism, Hasrat-e-Zindagi Mamuli, Forum Against Oppression of Women, The Bombay Catholic Sabha, Christian Development Association, Citizens for the Constitution, Zylo Foundation, Rahat Legal Aid Foundation, Synod of Pentecostal Churches, Central Mumbai Christian Fellowship, PZMS (Palghar Zilla Masiha Sangati), Students Islamic Organisation of India, Fridays for Future Mumbai, Christian Reform United People Association, United Christians of Mumbai, and Maharastra Minority Christian Development Council.

Published – August 25, 2026 10:33 am IST