Uttarakhand Anti-Conversion Law Faces Revisions After Governor Flags Errors
Uttarakhand's anti-conversion ordinance needs revisions after the Governor identified errors, delaying its implementation.
Photo by Brett Jordan
त्वरित संशोधन
Law: Uttarakhand Freedom of Religion (Amendment) Bill, 2022
Governor sent it back for rectification of errors
State plans to incorporate changes into an ordinance
Aims to make unlawful conversion a cognizable and non-bailable offense
Stricter penalties for forced/fraudulent conversions, especially involving vulnerable groups
महत्वपूर्ण तिथियां
दृश्य सामग्री
Anti-Conversion Laws in Indian States (December 2025)
This map highlights Indian states that have enacted anti-conversion laws, with Uttarakhand being the focal point of the current news. These laws aim to prevent conversions through force, fraud, or allurement, but often face constitutional challenges.
Loading interactive map...
State Legislative Process: Bill Assent & Ordinance Path
This flowchart illustrates the typical journey of a bill through a state legislature, highlighting the Governor's critical role in granting assent (Article 200) and the alternative route of ordinance promulgation (Article 213) when the legislature is not in session, as seen in the Uttarakhand case.
- 1.Bill Introduced in State Legislature
- 2.Bill Passed by State Legislature (Assembly/Both Houses)
- 3.Sent to Governor for Assent (Article 200)
- 4.Governor Gives Assent?
- 5.Bill Becomes an Act (Law)
- 6.Governor Withholds Assent
- 7.Bill Fails
- 8.Governor Returns Bill for Reconsideration
- 9.Legislature Reconsiders & Passes Again (with/without amendments)
- 10.Governor Must Give Assent
- 11.Governor Reserves Bill for President's Consideration
- 12.President's Assent (Article 201)
- 13.Legislature Not in Session?
- 14.Governor Promulgates Ordinance (Article 213)
- 15.Ordinance has Force of Law
- 16.Legislature Reassembles
- 17.Ordinance Approved by Legislature?
- 18.Ordinance Becomes an Act
- 19.Ordinance Lapses (after 6 weeks of reassembly or earlier if disapproved)
परीक्षा के दृष्टिकोण
Constitutional provisions related to freedom of religion (Article 25) and personal liberty (Article 21).
Role and powers of the Governor regarding state legislation (Article 200) and ordinance-making (Article 213).
Judicial review and landmark judgments concerning anti-conversion laws (e.g., Rev. Stanislaus case).
Federal structure and state legislative competence on matters of public order and morality.
Concept of secularism in India and its interpretation in the context of religious conversions.
Legal terminology: cognizable, non-bailable offenses, burden of proof.
विस्तृत सारांश देखें
सारांश
Uttarakhand's proposed anti-conversion law, the 'Uttarakhand Freedom of Religion (Amendment) Bill, 2022', which was passed by the Assembly, has been sent back by the Governor for revisions due to identified errors. The state government plans to incorporate the suggested changes into an ordinance, which will then be promulgated.
The original Bill aimed to make unlawful conversion a cognizable and non-bailable offense, with stricter penalties for forced or fraudulent conversions, particularly those involving women, minors, or Scheduled Castes/Tribes. The Governor's decision to send it back for rectification highlights the meticulous scrutiny required for laws touching upon fundamental rights and potential legal challenges.
पृष्ठभूमि
Anti-conversion laws in India have a history dating back to the 1960s, with states like Odisha and Madhya Pradesh being among the first to enact such legislation. These laws aim to prevent conversions induced by force, fraud, or allurement. However, they have consistently been a subject of debate regarding their constitutional validity, particularly concerning the fundamental right to freedom of religion (Article 25) and personal liberty (Article 21).
The Supreme Court, in the Rev. Stanislaus v. State of Madhya Pradesh (1977) case, upheld the validity of such laws, clarifying that the right to 'propagate' religion does not include the right to convert another person by force or fraud.
नवीनतम घटनाक्रम
The Uttarakhand Freedom of Religion (Amendment) Bill, 2022, passed by the state assembly, was returned by the Governor for revisions due to identified errors. This highlights the meticulous scrutiny required for laws touching upon fundamental rights.
The state government plans to reintroduce the revised provisions via an ordinance. The proposed law aims to make unlawful conversion a cognizable and non-bailable offense with stricter penalties, especially for conversions involving women, minors, or Scheduled Castes/Tribes, and often includes provisions for prior intimation to district authorities.
बहुविकल्पीय प्रश्न (MCQ)
1. Consider the following statements regarding the powers of the Governor in the Indian constitutional scheme: 1. The Governor can return a Bill passed by the State Legislature for reconsideration, but if the Bill is passed again by the Legislature with or without amendments, the Governor is constitutionally bound to give assent. 2. The power of the Governor to promulgate ordinances can be exercised only when the Legislative Assembly is not in session, or when both Houses (in bicameral states) are not in session. 3. An ordinance promulgated by the Governor must be laid before the State Legislature and ceases to operate six weeks from the reassembly of the Legislature if not approved. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
- A.1 and 2 only
- B.2 and 3 only
- C.1 and 3 only
- D.1, 2 and 3
उत्तर देखें
सही उत्तर: B
Statement 1 is incorrect. While the Governor can return a Bill for reconsideration, if the Bill is passed again, the Governor is not constitutionally bound to give assent. The Governor can still withhold assent or reserve the Bill for the consideration of the President (Article 200). Statement 2 is correct. Article 213(1) states that the Governor can promulgate ordinances only when the Legislative Assembly is not in session, or where there is a Legislative Council, when both Houses are not in session. Statement 3 is correct. Article 213(2)(a) mandates that an ordinance must be laid before the State Legislature and ceases to operate at the expiration of six weeks from the reassembly of the Legislature, or if before the expiration of that period a resolution disapproving it is passed by the Legislative Assembly and agreed to by the Legislative Council (if any).
2. With reference to the right to freedom of religion in India and anti-conversion laws, consider the following statements: 1. The right to 'propagate' religion under Article 25 of the Constitution includes the right to convert another person to one's own religion. 2. State laws prohibiting conversions induced by force, fraud, or allurement have been upheld by the Supreme Court as being within the permissible restrictions on freedom of religion. 3. The 'freedom of conscience' guaranteed by Article 25 protects an individual's right to choose any religion or no religion. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
- A.1 and 2 only
- B.2 and 3 only
- C.3 only
- D.1, 2 and 3
उत्तर देखें
सही उत्तर: B
Statement 1 is incorrect. In the landmark case of Rev. Stanislaus v. State of Madhya Pradesh (1977), the Supreme Court clarified that the right to 'propagate' religion under Article 25 does not include the right to convert another person, but rather the right to transmit or spread one's religion by an exposition of its tenets. Forced conversions are not protected. Statement 2 is correct. The Supreme Court in the Stanislaus case upheld the validity of state anti-conversion laws that prohibit conversions by force, fraud, or allurement, stating that these are not part of the right to propagate religion. Statement 3 is correct. The 'freedom of conscience' is a broad concept that encompasses an individual's internal freedom to believe or not believe in any religion, and to choose or change one's religion without coercion.
3. Consider the following statements regarding anti-conversion laws in India: 1. These laws typically make unlawful conversion a cognizable and non-bailable offense. 2. A common feature of these laws is the requirement for individuals intending to convert, and priests performing the conversion, to give prior notice to the district magistrate. 3. These laws often shift the burden of proof onto the accused to demonstrate that the conversion was not by force, fraud, or undue influence. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
- A.1 and 2 only
- B.2 and 3 only
- C.1 and 3 only
- D.1, 2 and 3
उत्तर देखें
सही उत्तर: D
Statement 1 is correct. As mentioned in the news summary and observed in various state anti-conversion laws, unlawful conversion is often categorized as a cognizable (police can arrest without a warrant) and non-bailable (bail is not a matter of right) offense. Statement 2 is correct. Many state anti-conversion laws, including those in Himachal Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, and Uttarakhand, include provisions for prior intimation to district authorities by individuals intending to convert and by religious leaders facilitating the conversion. Statement 3 is correct. A significant criticism and feature of several anti-conversion laws is the reversal of the burden of proof, where the accused (the person who converted or facilitated the conversion) must prove that the conversion was not unlawful (i.e., not by force, fraud, or allurement).