The case of Rev. Stainislaus vs State of Madhya Pradesh is a landmark judgment delivered by the Supreme Court of India on January 17, 1977, which defined the scope of the fundamental right to religion under the Constitution. The case originated from a challenge to the constitutional validity of the Madhya Pradesh Dharma Swatantraya Adhiniyam, 1968, and the Orissa Freedom of Religion Act, 1967, both of which prohibited religious conversion by force, fraud, or allurement.
The core problem the judgment solved was the interpretation of the word "propagate" in Article 25(1) of the Constitution, which guarantees all persons the right to freely profess, practice, and propagate religion. The Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice A.N. Ray, held that the right to propagate one's religion means the right to transmit or spread one's religious beliefs by an exposition of its tenets, but it does not include the fundamental right to convert another person to one's own religion. The Court reasoned that a fundamental right to convert would impinge upon the "freedom of conscience" guaranteed to all citizens under the same Article 25(1).
By upholding the state laws, the Court affirmed that the prohibition of conversions by force, fraud, or allurement was a valid exercise of legislative power, falling under the state's authority to maintain public order. The judgment established a crucial distinction: while the right to spread one's religion is protected, the act of converting another person through objectionable means is not.
This judgment is foundational to the concept of anti-conversion laws in India, and it connects directly to the legislative competence of state assemblies under the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution. The Madhya Pradesh Dharma Swatantraya Adhiniyam, 1968, which was upheld in this case, has since been repealed and replaced by the Madhya Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act, 2021. The new Act, like its predecessor, penalizes conversion by force, fraud, or allurement, but it introduces stricter punishments, makes all offences non-bailable, and specifically declares marriages done solely for conversion as null and void.