Maharashtra Anti-Conversion Law 2026 Challenged In Bombay HC Over Privacy, Religious Freedom Rights

The Maharashtra Freedom of Religion Act, 2026, has been challenged before the Bombay High Court by Islamic scholar Maulana Halimullah Farooque Ahemed Khan. The plea alleges that provisions on conversion notices, “allurement”, punishment for converting women and burden of proof violate privacy, autonomy, religious freedom and the presumption of innocence.

Add FPJ As a
Trusted Source
Maharashtra Anti-Conversion Law 2026 Challenged In Bombay HC Over Privacy, Religious Freedom Rights
FPJ News Service Updated: Friday, September 11, 2026, 10:53 PM IST
Maharashtra Anti-Conversion Law 2026 Challenged In Bombay HC Over Privacy, Religious Freedom Rights

The Bombay High Court will examine a challenge to provisions of Maharashtra’s new freedom of religion law | File Photo

Mumbai, September 11, 2026: The constitutional validity of the Maharashtra Freedom of Religion Act, 2026, has been challenged before the Bombay High Court, with the petitioner alleging that its provisions violate fundamental rights to privacy, autonomy and freedom of religion.

The petition, filed by 70-year-old Islamic scholar Maulana Halimullah Farooque Ahemed Khan through advocate Mateen Shaikh, argues that while the State can prohibit conversions through force or fraud, it cannot monitor consensual inter-faith relationships or voluntary religious conversions.

Petitioner Challenges Key Provisions

“The choice of a life partner and the decision concerning one’s faith constitute facets of personal autonomy, dignity, privacy and decisional freedom protected under Articles 21 and 25,” the plea states.

The petitioner has challenged Section 9(2), which provides enhanced punishment for converting women, as discriminatory. Section 2(a), defining “allurement”, is also assailed as vague and overbroad, with terms such as “better lifestyle” and “divine healing” potentially covering legitimate religious and charitable activities.

Privacy And Presumption Of Innocence

The mandatory 60-day notice for conversion has been challenged as an invasion of privacy, while Section 13, placing the burden of proof on the accused, is alleged to undermine the presumption of innocence.

Also Watch:

The plea seeks quashing of the law or strict interpretation limited to cases involving force, fraud or coercion.

On August 21, the Nagpur Bench had dismissed a similar petition over vague pleadings.

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

Published on: Friday, September 11, 2026, 10:53 PM IST

RECENT STORIES