MLA seeks anti-conversion law, writes to union minister
Singh described the issue as an "organised, well-funded campaign" that threatens India's civilisational identity, social harmony, and national security.
In his letter dated July 20, Singh cited the Chhangur Baba network and an ISIS-linked conversion module exposed in Agra, arguing that such incidents indicate a systemic pattern rather than isolated crimes. He wrote that conversion syndicates "weaponise deception," targeting vulnerable girls from Hindu, Scheduled Caste, and tribal communities through false identities, romantic grooming ("
love jihad
"), sham marriages, and mass "healing" congregations where victims are isolated and indoctrinated.
He also alleged that foreign-funded NGOs act as covert financial channels.
While states like Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, and Uttarakhand have passed laws to regulate religious conversions, Singh said the absence of a uniform central framework leaves exploitable gaps, as these networks operate across state lines. Current penalties—ranging from 1 to 10 years, depending on the state—are "grossly inadequate" against such organised mafias, he argued.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
I thought my dad was 'boring'. Now, I'm learning that boring stuff is often what matters most
CNA
Read More
Undo
Singh called for stricter punishments, including life imprisonment for masterminds of mass conversion rings and a minimum of 7–10 years for facilitators.
He also proposed mandatory pre- and post-conversion declarations to the district magistrate and judicial scrutiny of conversions linked to marriage. Other recommendations include the creation of a National Anti-Conversion Authority to track inter-state events and financial flows, and empowering the NIA in cases involving foreign funding or terror links.
Singh further urged immediate rescue and shelter support for victims, free legal aid, and strict penalties for identity concealment and digital radicalisation.
He also called for audits of religious charities and the suspension or banning of entities found abetting illegal conversions.
Citing legal frameworks in countries such as Nepal, Myanmar, Indonesia, and Russia that restrict conversions by coercion or inducement, Singh said India must act decisively to preserve its diversity and protect women and children.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
36 minutes ago
- Time of India
Trump vs. Harvard: A battle that tests the strength of American democracy and the price of intellectual freedom
Harvard's standoff with the Trump administration tests the price of dissent in American academia. January 2025 wasn't supposed to read like the script of a dystopian campus drama. Yet, within days of Donald Trump's second inauguration, American higher education found itself back in the crosshairs. Harvard University, that centuries-old fortress of intellectual prestige, became the frontline in a clash not over grades or graduation rates, but over politics, power, and the weaponisation of federal authority. This isn't the same old 'Trump vs. Academia' skirmish we saw in 2017. This time, it's a stress test of whether a White House—any White House—can muscle its way into university governance, dictate the fate of billions in research funds, and even toy with student visas as leverage. If you think this saga only concerns one elite campus, think again. What happened to Harvard between January and July 2025 may well be the blueprint for how political control over universities could be asserted in America for years to come. January–February 2025: The opening moves On January 29, barely a week after the oath-taking ceremony, Trump signed Executive Order 14188. Following this, the Department of Justice established the Federal Task Force to Combat Antisemitism on Campuses. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Free P2,000 GCash eGift UnionBank Credit Card Apply Now Undo At first glance, it seemed like another culture-war skirmish wrapped in civil rights language. But the fine print gave federal agencies unprecedented authority to probe universities, condition funding, and scrutinise so-called 'alien students' for ideological leanings. Harvard, along with dozens of institutions, received its first formal letter of 'concern' on February 27 from the Department of Justice, demanding meetings over alleged Title VI violations. For the uninitiated, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act bars institutions receiving federal funds from discriminating on the basis of race, colour, or national origin. These weren't polite invitations. They were the opening salvo in a campaign that would escalate beyond anything seen before in federal–academic relations. The groundwork was laid: The administration now had a legal hook (civil rights), a moral shield (antisemitism), and a political target (elite universities often painted as 'woke havens'). Harvard was merely the first domino. March–April 2025: From review to retaliation On March 31, the Task Force formally launched a federal review into Harvard's use of billions in federal research grants, citing alleged failures to protect Jewish students. Boston University Radio (WBUR) and multiple outlets reported that this review was the precursor to unprecedented fiscal scrutiny and laid the foundation for later punitive actions. Just days later, the White House sent a letter demanding sweeping changes at Harvard: Dismantle DEI programs, overhaul governance, adopt 'merit-based' hiring, submit to viewpoint diversity audits, and revise admissions policies. In other words, the federal government wasn't just enforcing civil rights, it was trying to rewrite campus rules by diktat. Harvard refused. What followed was a fiscal guillotine. On April 14, $2.2 billion in federal research grants were frozen, along with $60 million in contracts. The message was blunt: Comply or watch your labs go dark. Trump's Truth Social post on—calling Harvard a 'JOKE' teaching 'Hate and Stupidity' and suggesting it lose tax-exempt status—wasn't just an online bluster. It was the President setting policy through grievance politics. By April 16, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem piled on, demanding detailed records on every international student, threatening SEVP decertification (loss of Student and Exchange Visitor Program certification), and cancelling an additional $2.7 million in grants. Harvard struck back legally on April 21, filing its first lawsuit in the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts, to challenge the funding freeze as unconstitutional. The complaint asked the federal court to vacate punitive actions and restore billions in research dollars. But the damage was already done: Projects stalled, faculty recruitment froze, and students with research assistantships were left dangling, unsure if their stipends would arrive next semester. May 2025: Visa warfare on campus If April was about money, May targeted people. On May 5, Trump signed a proclamation declaring Harvard an 'unsuitable destination' for foreign students, citing nebulous national-security concerns. It was a shot across the bow, signalling that visas could be wielded as a political weapon. Then came May 22. ICE revoked Harvard's SEVP certification, effectively threatening the legal status of roughly 5,500–6,000 international students overnight. The timing was surgical: Just as spring exams wrapped, thousands of students risked being forced to leave the country or transfer. Harvard's emergency lawsuit on May 23 pulled it back from the brink—Judge Allison Burroughs issued a temporary restraining order hours later, halting the move. But the message was clear: Even the most prestigious university couldn't shield its students from the whims of political power when visas were used as leverage. For every prospective international student watching this unfold, the warning was unmistakable: In the US, your ability to study may hinge less on your merit than on whether your university angers the Oval Office or not. June–July 2025: Courtroom standoff and settlement signals By summer, the conflict had crystallised into two major lawsuits: One over the funding freeze, another over SEVP decertification. Both landed in Boston's federal court, with Harvard arguing that the administration's actions violated the First Amendment, Title VI protections, and due process laws. The Trump team countered that grant money was a privilege, not a right, and universities failing 'agency priorities' could have funding yanked at will. On July 21, oral arguments over the $2.2 billion freeze saw Judge Allison Burroughs grill both sides. A final ruling has not yet been issued, but the hearing laid bare the stakes: if Harvard loses, future presidents could dictate university policy through the purse strings, turning research funding into a political loyalty test. If Harvard wins, it would carve out a legal shield for academic freedom, albeit one forged in bitter litigation. Meanwhile, The New York Times revealed Harvard is exploring a potential settlement with the Trump administration, reportedly willing to pay up to $500 million to resolve the dispute. Negotiations reportedly focus on restoring access to more than $2 billion in frozen research funds while preserving governance autonomy, but the very premise of these talks is chilling. The figure is staggering, not just because of the money involved, but because of what it signals: Even the wealthiest and most powerful university in the country might have to 'pay tribute' to the White House to unlock funding it was already lawfully awarded. The talks mirror Columbia University's earlier $200 million settlement, but this is a higher‑stakes game. Harvard's endowment has become both shield and target, a financial bullseye for an administration eager to make an example of elite academia. Behind the headlines, DHS expanded its scrutiny to J-1 visas, research visas, and campus-linked foreign programs. Even without a final ruling, universities nationwide began quietly reviewing policies, fearing they'd be next. The chilling effect on student speech, faculty hiring, and international enrolment was immediate and measurable. Harvard's choice: Buy relief or win the law If Harvard settles, it risks sidelining the judiciary altogether, dodging the constitutional answer: Can a White House weaponise federal funding to police campus thought? The money tap may reopen, but the chance to set a legal boundary closes. The precedent becomes fear, telling every university president that when Washington knocks, resistance is futile and freedom negotiable. It transforms education into a marketplace where political compliance can be bought and dissent carries a billion-dollar price tag. If Harvard bows to this arrangement, it legitimises a dangerous precedent: Federal funding as ransom, with intellectual independence up for sale. TOI Education is on WhatsApp now. Follow us here Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!
New Indian Express
38 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
'Inhuman': Massive eviction drive launched in Assam's Golaghat; over 1500 Muslim families affected
GUWAHATI: The Assam government on Tuesday launched a massive eviction drive targeting over 1500 Muslim families residing at Uriamghat in Golaghat district and cleared 11,000 bighas of land, which the administration claimed they had encroached upon. Authorities deployed a large number of police and forest protection force personnel, along with over 150 excavators. A senior forest department official told TNIE that 'more than 20 per cent' of the land was cleared. A majority of the "settlers" had vacated the place after receiving notices from the government. Inspector General of Police Akhilesh Kumar Singh, who was at the site, told the media that shops and houses, built in the reserve forest areas, were demolished. "We gave police protection. There are also forest protection force personnel. We received the support of locals. Law and order situation is under control," Singh said. "A lot of the illegal settlers had left the place over the past few days after receiving notices. It was explained to them that they cannot stay inside the reserve forest anymore. They were convinced," he further said. Stating that the area is sufficiently secured, he said the drive would continue. An estimated 15,000 people, mostly Muslims, were affected by the drive. Vast swathes of the land had betel nut plantations. "Around 2,000 families are living in those areas. Out of them, notices were served to about 1,500 families, who illegally settled here. The remaining families are forest dwellers and have certificates from the Forest Rights Committee (FRC)," an official was quoted as saying by PTI. The families whose houses are being demolished belong to the Muslim community, while those having FRC certificates are from Bodo, Nepali, Manipuri and other communities, he added. "Around 80 per cent of the families who had received notices have already vacated their illegal settlements in the last few days. We are only demolishing their homes," the official added.
Time of India
39 minutes ago
- Time of India
Ritlal's teacher wife to face action for biz partnership
Patna: Rinku Devi, wife of incarcerated Danapur MLA Ritlal Yadav, is set to face legal action for being a partner in a construction company while serving as a govt school teacher in Patna. ADG (headquarters) Kundan Krishnan has written a letter to the additional chief secretary (ACS) of the education department, S Siddharth, for action against Rinku. Rinku is a contractual teacher employed at Kothwa Mushari Vidyalaya in Patna district. However, an investigation revealed that she was involved in business activities as a partner of a construction firm. Bihar STF is already reviewing a case related to RJD MLA Ritlal Yadav, and his family has come under administrative and legal scrutiny. In the letter sent to the education department, it has been mentioned that Rinku has been a partner in a firm named "Vijay Construction" since Nov 11, 2017. This came to light during the investigation of a case registered at Khagaul police station. The ADG stated in his letter that indulging in commercial activities while being in govt service is a violation of the Bihar Govt Servant's Conduct Rules, 1976, and the Bihar govt's 2024 notification for the code of conduct. Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Villas For Sale in Dubai Might Surprise You Villas in Dubai | Search Ads Get Info Undo by Taboola by Taboola Gangster-turned-politician Ritlal's wife has worked as a teacher for the last 19 years at the primary school in Kothwa Mushari, Danapur sub-division. Ritlal was arrested by Patna police for allegedly demanding extortion money from a builder. Ritlal, a close aide of RJD supremo Lalu Prasad, surrendered in the case in April this year at Danapur court. After keeping him in Beur jail for a few days, the police shifted him to Bhagalpur jail citing security reasons.
