Arunachal Christian Body Warns Against Framing Rules for Anti-Conversion Law
Summary
The BJP-led Arunachal Pradesh government is moving to frame implementation rules for the Arunachal Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act (APFRA), 1978, following a Gauhati High Court directive issued in September 2024, prompting strong opposition from the Christian community in the state.
●The APFRA, enacted in 1978, prohibits conversion from indigenous faiths through force, fraud, or inducement, but has remained largely dormant for decades due to the absence of implementing rules.
●The Gauhati High Court's directive has now compelled the state government to act, reigniting a long-standing tension between tribal identity protection and religious freedom guaranteed under Articles 25–28 of the Constitution.
●Christian organisations argue that operationalising the law would infringe upon their fundamental right to propagate religion and could be used to target minority communities.
●This development has significant implications for UPSC aspirants studying the intersection of tribal rights, religious freedom, state legislation, and judicial oversight in India's Northeast.
The Arunachal Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act, 1978 is one of India's earliest state-level anti-conversion laws, predating similar legislation in Odisha, Madhya Pradesh, and Himachal Pradesh.
●It was enacted to protect indigenous tribal belief systems — collectively called 'Donyi-Polo' — from proselytisation.
●Crucially, the Act has never been operationalised due to the absence of framing of rules, making the Gauhati High Court's 2024 directive a watershed moment.
●Article 25 guarantees the right to 'profess, practise and propagate' religion, but the Supreme Court in Rev.
●Stainislaus v.
●State of Madhya Pradesh (1977) held that the right to propagate does not include the right to convert another person.
●State anti-conversion laws, if they regulate force or fraud, are generally upheld as reasonable restrictions.
The Stainislaus judgment (1977) remains the constitutional cornerstone for validating state anti-conversion laws, distinguishing propagation from coercive conversion.
◎ In Simple Words
Imagine a very old rule from 1978 in Arunachal Pradesh that says people cannot be tricked or forced into changing their religion. This rule was never really used because no one wrote down exactly how to follow it. Now, a court told the government to finally write those instructions, but Christian groups in the state are worried this could be used to stop them from sharing their faith freely. It is like having a sleeping rule that is now being woken up, and different groups disagree about whether that is fair.
Factual Pointers
Practice · 1 question
With reference to the Arunachal Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act, 1978, consider the following statements:
1. It prohibits conversion from any religion through force, fraud, or inducement.
2. It was enacted primarily to protect indigenous tribal belief systems of Arunachal Pradesh.
3. The Supreme Court in Rev. Stainislaus case (1977) struck down similar state anti-conversion laws as unconstitutional.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Fundamental Rights, DPSP & Duties
This sub-topic has appeared in 14 UPSC Prelims questions.