"I do not want my house to be walled in on all sides and my windows to be stuffed. I want the cultures of all the lands to be blown about my house as freely as possible".1

India is a land of diverse religions and beliefs. The Indian Constitution guarantees its citizens the right to freedom of religion and the right to propagate one's religion, subject to reasonable restrictions2. The right to propagate one's religion has been a contentious issue in India, with some groups advocating for the propagation of their religion, while others express concerns about the use of force, coercion, or inducement to convert individuals to another religion3.

This issue has gained renewed attention with the proposed Anti-Conversion Bill, which seeks to regulate religious conversions in India. The concept of propagation without proselytisation is based on the idea of respect for the autonomy and dignity of individuals. It is founded on the belief that individuals should be free to choose their religious beliefs and that any attempt to coerce or force them to convert is a violation of their human rights4.

In this sense, the concept of propagation without proselytisation aligns with the principles of liberalism, which emphasizes the importance of individual freedom and autonomy.5 This paper aims to explore the concept of propagation without proselytisation, the relevant constitutional provisions, case laws, and historical background, and provide a comparative study with other countries.

Historical Overview
The concept of propagation without proselytisation has its roots in the religious and philosophical traditions of India. It advocates for the spread of one's religion through peaceful and non-coercive means6. The concept of propagation without proselytisation has been endorsed by various religious leaders in India, including Mahatma Gandhi and Swami Vivekananda. Mahatma Gandhi believed that the spread of religion should be through the power of persuasion, while Swami Vivekananda advocated for the propagation of religion through education and service.7

The issue of religious conversions has been a contentious issue in India for centuries. India has a long history of religious diversity, with various religions coexisting peacefully8. However, with the arrival of colonial powers in India, religious conversions became a tool for political and social control. Missionaries from European countries such as Portugal, Spain, and Britain, sought to convert the local population to Christianity, and Hindu leaders reacted by opposing the conversions.9

During the British rule in India, there were several laws enacted to regulate religious conversions. The earliest such law was the Bengal Sati Regulation, 1829, which prohibited the practice of Sati, where a widow would immolate herself on her husband's funeral pyre.10 This regulation was followed by several other laws that aimed to curb various religious practices deemed harmful or objectionable by the British authorities.

In 1860, the British Indian government enacted the Indian Penal Code, which included provisions on "offences relating to religion" (Sections 295 to 298). These provisions criminalized acts that were intended to outrage the religious feelings of any class of citizens by insulting their religion or religious beliefs. Section 295A, which was added in 1927, criminalized deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs.11

In 1923, the Madras Christian Council passed a resolution condemning the use of force, fraud or inducement for religious conversions. This resolution was followed by similar resolutions by other Christian organizations in India. These resolutions were significant because they recognized the need to respect the religious beliefs and sentiments of others and to promote interfaith harmony.12

Post-Independence, the Indian Constitution guaranteed its citizens the right to freedom of religion and the right to propagate one's religion, subject to reasonable restrictions13. However, the issue of religious conversions continued to be a contentious issue, with some groups expressing concerns about the use of force, coercion, or inducement to convert individuals to another religion, several states enacted laws to regulate religious conversions.14

The first such law was enacted by the Madhya Pradesh government in 196815. Madhya Pradesh Dharma Swatantrya Adhiniyam, 1968, and similar laws enacted by other states, raise serious questions about the protection of religious freedom and the constitutional rights of individuals.16 This law required that any person seeking to convert to another religion must give notice to the district magistrate at least 30 days in advance. The law also prohibited conversions that were induced by force, fraud or allurement.17

In 2021, the Uttar Pradesh government enacted the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Ordinance, popularly known as the anti-conversion law.18 This law prohibits religious conversions that are induced by force, fraud or allurement, and requires that a person seeking to convert must give notice to the district magistrate at least 60 days in advance. The law also provides for imprisonment and fines for those who violate its provisions.

The anti-conversion law has been criticized by many, including human rights organizations and religious minorities, who argue that it is a violation of the right to freedom of religion and expression. The law has also been challenged in courts, and its constitutional validity is yet to be determined.

Constitutional Provisions

Article 25 of the Indian Constitution guarantees the right to freely profess, practice and propagate religion, subject to public order, morality, and health. This provision guarantees the right to propagate one's religion, but it also places reasonable restrictions on this right.19 The state has the power to regulate religious conversions to protect individuals from being coerced, induced, or forced to convert to another religion. Article 25(1) of the Constitution reads as follows:

"Subject to public order, morality, and health, all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practice and propagate religion."20

The Constitution also guarantees the right to freedom of speech and expression, which includes the right to disseminate information about one's religion. Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution guarantees the right to freedom of speech and expression, subject to reasonable restrictions.21

Legal Precedents
The issue of religious conversions has been addressed by various courts in India. The Supreme Court of India has repeatedly upheld the right to propagate one's religion, subject to reasonable restrictions. In the case of Rev Stanislaus vs State of Madhya Pradesh 22, the Supreme Court held that the right to propagate one's religion includes the right to communicate one's beliefs to others. The court held that religious conversions cannot be equated with force, fraud, or inducement, and that individuals have the right to choose their religion.

In the case of S.P. Mittal vs Union of India 23, the Supreme Court held that the right to propagate one's religion includes the right to persuade others to accept one's religion. The court held that religious conversions through the use of force, fraud, or inducement are not protected under the Constitution, and the state has the power to regulatesuch conversions to protect individuals.

In the case of Indian Young Lawyers Association vs The State of Kerala 24, the Supreme Court held that the right to propagate one's religion does not extend to the right to convert another individual to one's religion. The court held that religious conversions should be voluntary and not induced by force, fraud, or inducement. The court also held that the state has the power to regulate religious conversions to prevent forced conversions.

In the case of Stanislaus vs State of Madhya Pradesh 25, the Supreme Court held that the term "propagate" used in Article 25 of the Constitution means to "transmit or spread one's religion by an exposition of its tenets." The court held that the right to propagate one's religion is subject to reasonable restrictions, and the state has the power to regulate religious conversions to protect individuals from being coerced, induced, or forced to convert to another religion.

These case laws illustrate the delicate balance that India seeks to maintain between the freedom of religion and the need to regulate religious conversions to prevent coercion, inducement, or fraud.

Comparative Study
Propagation without proselytisation is a concept that is not unique to India. Many other countries around the world have grappled with the issue of religious conversions and the right of religious organizations to propagate their religion without engaging in forceful or fraudulent practices. In this comparative study, we will look at how different countries approach the issue of religious conversions and how they regulate it.

In the United States, the First Amendment of the Constitution protects freedom of speech, religion and expression, which includes the right to propagate one's religion.26 In the landmark case of Cantwell v. Connecticut (1940)27, the Supreme Court held that the state could not restrict an individual's right to evangelize or preach on the streets. However, the Court also recognized that the right to propagate one's religion is not absolute and may be subject to reasonable restrictions in the interest of public order, safety or morality.

In Canada, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees freedom of religion, conscience and expression. The Supreme Court has held that the right to propagate one's religion is protected under freedom of expression, and any restrictions on it must be justified in a free and democratic society.28

In Australia, the Constitution protects the right to freedom of religion, which includes the right to propagate one's religion. However, the High Court has also recognized that the government may regulate religious activities that are harmful or threatening to public order, safety or morality.29

In contrast, countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran, and some other Islamic countries prohibit proselytization of any kind, and the propagation of religions other than Islam is illegal. In these countries, the government plays an active role in regulating and monitoring religious activities to ensure compliance with Islamic laws.30

In China, religious activities are heavily regulated by the state, and proselytization is prohibited. Only government-approved religious groups are allowed to operate, and any activities outside the state-sanctioned system are deemed illegal.31

A comparative study of different countries shows that the legal framework and approach to propagation without proselytization vary significantly. While some countries protect the right to propagate one's religion under the right to freedom of speech and expression, others place strict regulations on religious activities, and some prohibit propagation of religions other than the state-approved religion altogether. It is important to strike a balance between the freedom to practice and propagate one's religion and the government's obligation to ensure public order, safety, and morality.

Anti-Conversion Bill

The Anti-Conversion Bill, also known as the Freedom of Religion Bill, seeks to regulate religious conversions in India. The bill has been introduced in various states in India, and its provisions vary from state to state. The bill seeks to regulate religious conversions by requiring individuals who wish to convert to another religion to obtain prior permission from the state government. The bill also seeks to penalize individuals who use force, fraud, or inducement to convert individuals to another religion.

Critics of the bill argue that it violates the right to freedom of religion and the right to propagate one's religion. They argue that the bill places undue restrictions on the right to convert to another religion and may be used to target minority communities32. Supporters of the bill argue that it is necessary to regulate religious conversions to prevent forced conversions and maintain social harmony.33

One of the main criticisms of anti-conversion bills is that they are often used to target religious minorities. The accusations on these religious minorities have been debunked by many human rights organizations and scholars, who argue that they are based on false and misleading information.

Another criticism of anti-conversion bills is that they are vague and overbroad. Many of the bills define "force," "fraud," and "inducement" in very broad terms, leaving room for abuse by law enforcement officials and religious extremists. There are also concerns that these bills could be used to target religious organizations that engage in legitimate religious activities, such as evangelism and charitable work.34

Despite these criticisms, several state governments in India have passed anti-conversion bills or are considering doing so. These include the states of Uttar Pradesh35, Madhya Pradesh36, Gujarat37, and Himachal Pradesh38. The bills vary in their provisions, but generally require individuals who want to convert to a different religion to obtain prior permission from the government. They also impose penalties on those who engage in "forced conversions" or inducement.

The constitutionality of these bills has been challenged in several courts. the issue of propagation without proselytisation and anti-conversion bills in India is a complex one. While there is a need to regulate and prevent forced conversions, it is essential to ensure that these regulations do not violate the fundamental right to freedom of religion. It is crucial to strike a balance between the two, and any legislation aimed at regulating religious conversions must be carefully crafted and narrowly tailored to achieve its objective. The Indian judiciary has an essential role to play in this regard, and it is crucial that it upholds the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution

Conclusion
The right to propagate one's religion is an essential aspect of the right to freedom of religion39. The Indian Constitution guarantees its citizens the right to propagate their religion, subject to reasonable restrictions40. The issue of religious conversions has been a contentious issue in India, with some groups advocating for the propagation of their religion, while others express concerns about the use of force, coercion, or inducement to convert individuals to another religion.

The proposed Anti-Conversion Bill seeks to regulate religious conversions in India, and its provisions have been a subject of debate. While it is important to regulate religious conversions to prevent forced conversions, it is also essential to ensure that the right to propagate one's religion is not unduly restricted. A balance must be struck between the two to maintain social harmony and respect for fundamental rights.

The anti-conversion bill, which seeks to regulate religious conversions in India, is a violation of this fundamental right. The bill requires individuals who wish to convert to another religion to obtain prior permission from the state government and to provide notification to the district magistrate. This is a clear infringement on the right to freedom of religion and expression, as it places unnecessary and arbitrary restrictions on an individual's ability to practice and propagate their religion.

Moreover, the anti-conversion bill is based on the flawed assumption that religious conversions are inherently forced, fraudulent or induced by allurement. This assumption is not only inaccurate but also prejudicial towards religious minorities who have historically been subjected to discrimination and persecution in India. The bill creates an atmosphere of suspicion and hostility towards religious minorities and undermines their right to freely practice and propagate their religion.41

Furthermore, the anti-conversion bill is a violation of the principle of secularism, which is enshrined in the Constitution of India42. The state should not interfere in matters of religion or promote any particular religion, as this goes against the principles of a secular democracy. The anti-conversion bill, by seeking to regulate religious conversions, goes against this principle and promotes a particular religious ideology.

In conclusion, the anti-conversion bill is a regressive and unconstitutional piece of legislation that undermines the fundamental right to freedom of religion and expression. It is a violation of the principles of secularism and democracy and goes against the spirit of the Constitution of India. As Nani Palkhivala once said,

"The Constitution is not a mere lawyer's document, it is a vehicle of life, and its spirit is always the spirit of the age."43

The spirit of the age demands that we uphold the fundamental rights of all individuals, regardless of their religion, caste or creed.

End-Notes:

1. Mahatma Gandhi, The Story of My Experiments with Truth (1927).
2. Constitution of India art. 25, 26 (1950).
3. Sairam Bhat, The Right to Propagate Religion in India: An Overview, 7 NUJS L. Rev. 159 (2014).
4. Nathaniel Samuel, Propagation Without Proselytisation, 55 Indian J. of Human Rights & the Law 42 (2019).
5. Brian Barry, Culture and Equality: An Egalitarian Critique of Multiculturalism (Harvard University Press, 2001).
6. S.N. Balagangadhara, The Heathen in His Blindness…: Asia, the West, and the Dynamic of Religion (Brill, 1994).
7. S. J. Samartha, "Propagation without Proselytization: A Christian Perspective," Dialogue & Alliance 9, no. 2 (1995): 61-67.
8. Rajagopal, Arvind. "Religious Conversions and Human Rights in India." Human Rights Quarterly 27, no. 3 (2005): 886-916.
9. Bayly, C. A. "Religious Conversion and the Indian Response: The Dynamics of Conversionism in Colonial North India." The Journal of Asian Studies 29, no. 2 (1970): 267-281.
10. The Bengal Sati Regulation, XVII of 1829, § 1.
11. Baxi, Upendra. "The Right to Religious Freedom in India." Human Rights Quarterly 6, no. 1 (1984): 87-108.
12. Devasahayam, Roy, and George Gispert-Sauch. "Christianity in India: Conversion, Community Development, and Religious Freedom." In Christianity in Indian Context, edited by P. Pratap Kumar, 191-213. Delhi: ISPCK, 2014.
13. Supra note 2.
14. Soni, Preeti. "Regulating Religious Conversion in India: Constitutional and Policy Challenges." In Religion, Law and Society: Across the Globe, edited by Benjamin Schonthal and Richard Mohr, 67-84. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018.
15. Madhya Pradesh Dharma Swatantrya Adhiniyam, 1968 (Madhya Pradesh Act No. 19 of 1968).
16. Chandrachud, Y. V. "The Constitutionality of Anti-Conversion Laws." In Religious Freedom in India, edited by Tahir Mahmood, 137-156. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.
17. Supra note 15.
18. Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Ordinance, 2020 (U.P. Ordinance No. 21 of 2020).
19. Supra note 2.
20. Id.
21. Constitution of India, art. 19(1)(a).
22. Rev. Stanislaus v. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 1977 SC 908 (India).
23. S.P. Mittal v. Union of India, (1983) 1 SCC 51 (India).
24. Indian Young Lawyers Association v. The State of Kerala, (2018) 11 SCC 1 (India).
25. Supra note 22.
26. U.S. Const. amend. I.
27. Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296 (1940).
28. Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s.2: laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/Const/page-15.html
29. Constitution of Australia, available at legislation.gov.au/Const/Overview; Church of the New Faith v. Commissioner for Pay-roll Tax (Vic) (1983) 154 CLR 120; Islamic Council of Victoria Inc v. Catch the Fire Ministries Inc (2006) 229 CLR 1.
30. Mayer, A. E. (2017). Islam and Religious Conversion. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Religion. doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780199340378.013.315.
31. "China's religious believers and their human rights," Amnesty International, 2020, amnesty.org/en/latest/campaigns/2019/12/china-religious-believers/.
32. "Anti Conversion Laws and Freedom of Religion in India" by Human Rights Watch: hrw.org/report/2021/10/26/conversion-factories/anti-conversion-laws-and-freedom-religion-india; "Anti-Conversion Laws in India: A Critical Analysis" by the International Journal of Law and Jurisprudence: ijlj.in/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Dr.-Rupendra-Bhadoria-Anti-Conversion-Laws-in-India-A-Critical-Analysis.pdf
33. "The legislation aims to check forced conversions, maintain social harmony and ensure that the exercise of the right to religious freedom is not abused to cause incitement or to disturb public order." - "The Constitutionality of Anti-Conversion Laws," The Wire, December 2020. thewire.in/law/anti-conversion-laws-constitutionality-religious-freedom
34. "In practice, the legal provisions against 'forceful' conversion are frequently used by the majority community against religious minorities to harass and intimidate them, and even to cover up instances of violence against them." - Amnesty International India, amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2021/03/india-anti-conversion-laws-used-to-harass-minorities-and-violate-right-to-freedom-of-religion/
35. Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Ordinance, 2020.
36. Madhya Pradesh Freedom of Religion Bill, 2021, see at mpvidhansabha.nic.in/FINAL%20PDF/09.%2023.03.2021.pdf
37. Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act, 2003. (Gujarat Act No. 22 of 2003).
38. Himachal Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act, 2019. Act No. 11 of 2019. Gazette Notification No. 12-13/2019-Leg.-1, dated 30th August, 2019.
39. Supra note 2.
40. Id.
41. UN Human Rights Council, Report of the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, Ahmed Shaheed, 2020.
42. S.R. Bommai v. Union of India, (1994) 3 SCC 1.
43. Nani Palkhivala, "Our Constitution: An Introduction to India's Constitution and Constitutional Law", 3rd edition, 2004.