Indian politics is no stranger to inflammatory rhetoric-in recent years, Hindu nationalism has been dominant in shaping these politics, generating an anti-Muslim narrative that is starkly at odds with India’s reputation as a secular democracy. Muslims account for roughly 14 per cent of India’s 1.3 billion population. For decades, they have been at the receiving end of structural, cultural and direct violence. This violence has only magnified since the BJP was first voted into power and then re-elected with a larger majority in 2019. Cities with Islamic names have been renamed. Hindu textbooks are routinely rewritten to legitimize Hindu nationalist ideology. Hundreds of Muslims have been lynched to death with little to no opposition from bystanders who, thanks to state censorship, don’t really have the capacity to object anyway. Dissent at any level, even from Hindus, is instantly stifled. Preexisting communal divisions between Hindus and Muslims have only been reinforced by Hindutva forces who use Muslims as a crucial scapegoat in their pursuit to establish Hindu supremacy. Indeed, anti-Muslim rhetoric has come particularly in handy to prevent inter-faith marriages. In what has been termed “love jihad”, Hindutva nationalists have long accused Muslim men of luring unsuspecting Hindu women into marriage. Two years ago, numerous states including Uttar Pradesh passed legislation to clamp down on religious conversions for interfaith marriages. The ordinance was quickly ingrained into the law, becoming a non-bailable offence with up to 10 years in prison. What was once a fringe extremist theory has now become mainstream, reflecting the deep-seated anxieties of Hindutva politics which seeks to control both Hindus and Muslims by restricting their choices. The Indian constitution recognizes personal liberty and individual autonomy, meaning that the state cannot interfere in the marriage of consenting adults or legislate someone’s choice of partners. If a conversion is a free act of conscience, restrictions imposed by vaguely-worded laws pose a serious threat to both international human rights instruments and the religious freedom enshrined in the Indian constitution itself. By institutionalising communalism, the government has begun speaking for its people as opposed to being a spokesperson for their needs, turning the constitutional state into a vigilante state that brazenly erodes the legitimate right to make decisions for one’s self. *