Chhattisgarh has enacted one of India's most stringent anti-conversion laws — replacing a 58-year-old act with sweeping new provisions that will reshape religious freedom in the state.

The Chhattisgarh Assembly has passed the Dharma Swatantrya (Freedom of Religion) Bill 2026, making it one of the most comprehensive and far-reaching anti-conversion legislations in India. Introduced by Home Minister and Deputy Chief Minister Vijay Sharma — who held over 50 marathon consultations to finalise the bill — the new law replaces the outdated Chhattisgarh Dharma Swatantrya Act of 1968. It passed by voice vote, with BJP MLAs breaking into chants of "Jai Shri Ram" on the floor of the House. The opposition staged a walkout, calling for broader consultation before passage.

What the Law Says — Punishments in Detail

The bill establishes a tiered punishment framework based on the severity and nature of the illegal conversion.

For standard cases of illegal conversion through force, allurement, fraud or misrepresentation, the punishment is 7 to 10 years imprisonment and a minimum fine of Rs 5 lakh.

Where the victim is a minor, a woman, or belongs to SC, ST or OBC communities, the punishment is enhanced to 10 to 20 years imprisonment and a minimum fine of Rs 10 lakh.

For mass conversions, the penalty is the most severe — 10 years to life imprisonment and a minimum fine of Rs 25 lakh.

Any person who assists or facilitates an illegal conversion — even in a supporting role — faces a minimum of 6 months and up to 3 years in prison, along with a Rs 2 lakh fine.

Repeat offenders — those convicted of facilitating illegal conversion, who subsequently commit the offence again after serving their sentence — will face life imprisonment. Courts may reduce this in exceptional circumstances for special reasons on record.

60 Days' Prior Notice — Mandatory for All Conversions

One of the most operationally significant provisions of the bill is the mandatory prior notice requirement. Any individual wishing to voluntarily convert their religion must submit an application to the District Collector at least 60 days in advance. This requirement applies not just to the person converting but also to the priest, pastor, maulvi or religious officiant conducting the conversion ceremony — they too must notify the district administration 60 days prior. Any conversion conducted without this prior notice will be treated as illegal and will invite immediate arrest.

Marriage-Based Conversion Declared Void

The bill contains specific provisions targeting conversions conducted solely for the purpose of marriage — widely referred to in political discourse as "love jihad." Under the new law, if a court determines that a marriage was solemnised with the primary intention of causing a religious conversion, that marriage will be declared legally void. Couples intending to convert prior to marriage must declare their intention two months in advance, and the District Magistrate will personally conduct an inquiry into the matter.

Crackdown on Foreign Funding

The bill also takes direct aim at foreign-funded conversion activities. Any organisation found to be involved in allurement-based or mass conversion using foreign funding will face cancellation of registration and heavy financial penalties. The government has made explicit its intent to block overseas money from influencing religious demographics in the state.

Special Courts — Six-Month Fast Track

To ensure swift justice, the bill mandates the establishment of a special court in every district of Chhattisgarh dedicated to hearing cases under this law. The government's stated objective is to resolve all cases within six months of filing.

Why Chhattisgarh Felt This Law Was Needed

The government has pointed to rising tensions in tribal-dominated regions — particularly Bastar, Jashpur and Raigarh — as the primary justification for the law. Large-scale conversion of tribal communities to Christianity has been a source of conflict in these areas, with disputes between converted and non-converted tribal groups sometimes turning violent. In Narayanpur, Bastar, the friction has reportedly escalated into factional clashes. The government argues that the 1968 law lacked the teeth to address modern methods of inducement and organised conversion networks.

Chhattisgarh has an estimated population of 3.3 crore, of whom approximately 2.38 crore are Hindu, 4.90 lakh are Christian and 5.14 lakh are Muslim. The state has around 900 churches, including the second largest Roman Catholic Cathedral in Asia located in Kunkuri, Jashpur — a major centre of Christian worship drawing devotees from multiple states.

Opposition's Stand — Unconstitutional, Rushed

The Congress-led opposition walked out before the vote, arguing that a law of this magnitude — with implications for fundamental rights and religious freedom guaranteed under the Constitution — should not have been passed without consulting retired Supreme Court and High Court judges, legal experts and representatives of all political parties. They have signalled a possible legal challenge to the bill.

A Law That Will Be Tested in Court

The Chhattisgarh Freedom of Religion Bill 2026 is already one of the most debated pieces of state legislation in India this year. Its constitutionality — particularly the provisions on prior notice, marriage-based conversion being void, and the extent of punishment — is almost certain to face scrutiny in the High Court and potentially the Supreme Court. Whether it withstands that scrutiny will determine whether it becomes a model for other BJP-governed states or a cautionary tale about legislative overreach.

The fourth day of the Chhattisgarh Assembly's budget session descended into chaos on Thursday as opposition Congress legislators stormed out of the House after raising the sensitive issue of custodial deaths in the state. Former Chief Minister Bhupesh Baghel led the charge, demanding a thorough investigation into the deaths of 66 prisoners and alleging a cover-up by the state government.

66 Custodial Deaths in One Year: Government Admits

During the Question Hour, Baghel raised the issue of inmates who died in various jails across the state, prompting a response from Home Minister Vijay Sharma. Sharma provided official data stating that between January 2025 and January 31, 2026, a total of 66 prisoners had died in custody.

However, the statistics did little to pacify the opposition. Bhupesh Baghel immediately sought a name-wise list of the deceased, specifically demanding details about the death of tribal leader Jeevan Thakur.

Responding to this, Home Minister Vijay Sharma confirmed that Jeevan Thakur's name was on the list, attributing his death to illness despite medical treatment. He assured the House that all necessary inquiries were being conducted as per established procedures.

'Tribal Leader Was Killed Inch by Inch': Bhupesh Baghel

Dissatisfied with the government's response, the former Chief Minister escalated his attack. Bhupesh Baghel rejected the possibility of a simple magistrate's inquiry and demanded a probe by a dedicated House committee of the Assembly.

In a dramatic statement that intensified the confrontation between Bhupesh Baghel VS Vijay Sharma, Baghel labeled Jeevan Thakur's death as "state-sponsored murder."

"A tribal leader was killed inch by inch. This is a highly sensitive matter, and the government is trying to suppress it," Baghel charged from the opposition benches. His remarks drew sharp counter-arguments from the treasury benches, leading to heated exchanges.

Navya Malik's Name Echoes in Drug Case Discussion

Amid the heated debate over custodial deaths, the name of alleged drug peddler Navya Malik also surfaced in the Assembly. Bhupesh Baghel questioned why her name was missing from the government's list of 282 drug-related cases. He sought information about her alleged foreign connections, putting the government on the defensive regarding its crackdown on narcotics.

Home Minister Vijay Sharma clarified that out of the 282 cases, charge sheets had been filed in 206, and 662 accused individuals had been arrested. On the specific Navya Malik drug case, he stated that complete details would be provided once all information was compiled, assuring the House that no lapses would be tolerated.

Opposition Walks Out

The session witnessed continued sloganeering from Congress MLAs, including Savitri Manndavi, who raised questions about arrest procedures and jail transfers. Unconvinced by the government's assurances and alleging a breakdown of law and order, the entire opposition staged a walkout.

The dramatic events have once again spotlighted the critical issue of custodial deaths in Chhattisgarh, raising serious questions about prison conditions and police accountability in the state.