On Friday, Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Mohan Yadav announced that the state government is mulling over the draconian proposal to introduce the death penalty for people found guilty of forcibly converting minor girls. This represents yet another commitment by the government to protect the rights and freedoms of all its citizens, especially now extremely vulnerable young women.
The new proposal involved an amendment, whereby the death penalty would be imposed for the conviction of crimes related to the forceful religious conversion of minor girls. Similar to this, in Madhya Pradesh, efforts have always gone in strong succession towards the enacting of laws aimed at maintaining no illegal conversions of religions.
The original Freedom of Religion Act was enacted in 1968, and henceforth, till now, illegal conversion won’t be tolerated. The regulations state the conversion should be operation force, fraud, or induction. Imprisonment is the penalty, and fines exist for this crime.
But some recent happenings have made the government think of something that is much harsher. Chief Minister Yadav expressed the need for much stricter penalties that would serve as an effective deterrent against the crimes. “We can’t allow any form of exploitation of our daughters under the pretext of religious conversion,” he stated.
Occurring just after several public uproars for justice, the proposal would provide penalties tougher in spirit than this and that. The act of convincing young girls to change their religion usually brings forth exploitation and abuse—this act alone irritated the public consciousness into demanding stricter laws that could help protect the tender population against all forms of attacks. Madhya Pradesh’s proposed legislation born from intense public agitation would find their parallel legislation passed by other Indian states in ferocious responses to forced religious conversions. Other Indian states like Uttar Pradesh and Karnataka promulgated legislation providing for severe punishment for miscreants responsible for these conversions, particularly those targeting minors, women, and individuals from marginalized sections of society.
This entails some extensive reflections on both the legal and social implications in relation to the subject: the introduction of a death penalty for forced religious conversions by one law will mean a huge heightening of deterrents legally.
Experts in the legal field acknowledge apparently that while the intention is safeguarding vulnerable individuals, one has to think seriously about compliance with constitutional and human rights standards in the context of this legislation’s implementation.
Their more general argument is that the death penalty has no means by which to effectively deter some boundary activities and is fraught with the risk of misuse. Other measures have to find their way into the popular consciousness, besides socio-economic support for vulnerable communities—the whole crusade against forced conversions.
The proposal has drawn mixed reactions from different quarters. Those in favor are certain that strict laws would deter others and give bedraggled young girls some proper protection.
“This is a welcome step toward protecting the safety and dignity of our daughters,” said Ramesh Sharma, a social activist based in Bhopal. However, human rights organizations are not so buoyed, expressing trepidation about possible misuse of the laws. It is absolutely necessary to protect individuals from forced conversions; however, imposition of the death penalty raises serious ethical and legal questions,” said Anjali Verma, an NGO human rights representative.
The state government is associated with the proposed amendment in the next assembly session. If so, this means that Madhya Pradesh would turn into the first state in India that prescribes conviction of the death penalty for forced religious conversions of minor girls. Chief Minister Yadav called for a roundtable debate, underlining that the state will involve suggestions from legal experts, civil society, and the public to ensure that the law is strong and fair. “Our goal is to create a safe and just society in which every person can freely profess his or her religion without fear or coercion,” he said.
