“Anti-Conversion Laws Are Anti-Choice, Personal Choice Made Public, Dalits Forced To Defend Personal Choices”: Retd Judge Muralidhar

Retd Judge Muralidhar

Senior Advocate and former Orissa High Court Chief Justice, Dr. S Muralidhar, recently spoke against anti-conversion laws in India, calling them “anti-choice” rather than laws against forced conversions.

Speaking at a panel discussion organized by ADF India on February 28, he pointed out that these laws assume any religious conversion happens due to intimidation or coercion, rather than being a personal choice.

Presumption Of Coercion & Burden Of Proof

Muralidhar explained that anti-conversion laws shift the burden of proof onto the person accused of converting someone, rather than on the person who has converted.

These laws are not really about preventing forced conversions but about restricting freedom of choice. They assume that if someone changes their religion, it must be due to pressure or coercion. That is why the accused, rather than the person who converted, has to prove their innocence,” he said.

He further stated that the real target of these laws is personal choice, especially Dalits, who often convert to escape caste discrimination.

Public Scrutiny & Humiliation

Muralidhar highlighted how these laws create unnecessary hurdles for those who wish to convert. He pointed out that a Dalit wanting to embrace Buddhism must publicly announce their decision to the district magistrate, which exposes them to scrutiny and humiliation.

Why should a person have to justify their personal choice of religion to government officials? This violates the fundamental right to privacy, as upheld in the Puttaswamy judgment. A person’s religion, food, dress, and prayer choices are deeply personal, but these laws force people to make them public and defend themselves.”

Encouraging Vigilantism

Another major flaw in these laws, according to Muralidhar, is that they allow anyone—not just the person allegedly forced to convert—to file a complaint.

Ideally, only the person who claims to be a victim of forced conversion should be able to complain. But under these laws, any relative, or even a random individual, can file a complaint. This has led to vigilante groups monitoring government notices for interfaith marriages and conversions, then harassing those involved.”

Deeper Social Issue

Muralidhar concluded by raising an important question: Even if courts declare these laws unconstitutional, will Indian society change?

Our society still holds deep-seated prejudices. True victory will come when we, as a society, transform ourselves, overcome these biases, and embrace the constitutional values of equality and freedom.

His speech highlighted the urgent need for legal and social reform to ensure that individuals can freely exercise their right to choose their faith without fear or public harassment.