The Nehru Report and Muslim Rights — Page 35
[ 35 ] peace, it is therefore banned. You may proclaim your religion but cannot invite others to accept it. Similarly the law could be held to mean that as conversion leads to a disturbance of the peace, it is henceforth prohibited. The law of the liberty of conscience cannot prevent such an interpretation, because it is solely concerned with belief. Conversion means abandoning one community and joining the rank of another. Even if it were not so interpreted, at least a law may be enacted to the effect that no person can change his religion without a certi ficate from the Magistrate. It may be argued in favour of such action that in this way the chance of compulsion and the use of force will be prevented. Such a procedure is bound to stop religious conversions as is the case at present in several States. Firstly, because the people cannot undergo such a tedious procedure. If they apply for such permit then they are subjected to such questions as, who was the preacher, what was the manner of his preaching, whether force was anplied. and similar other questions, under the stress of which they are compelled to give up the idea of changing their religion. Instances are not wanting, and I am prepared to prove them. In short, the Article relating to religion has several loop holes which can serve to unduly restrict religious free dom. Thus the Nehru-Report fails to meet the Muslim demand from this view-point also. To my mind it actu ally runs counter to that demand. For in the chapter on " Fundamental Rights" in Article 12 it says:-" No person attending any school, receiving state aid or other public money shall be compelled to attend the religious instruction that may be given in the school. '' If the above article be read in the light of the fact that it is quite possible that under the future Government of India, a law may be enacted to the effect that no private school will be permitted which refuse to accept