Rajasthan government’s disturbed areas Bill gives state sweeping powers to block property sales

The BJP-led Rajasthan government’s proposal to introduce the controversial “Disturbed Areas” Bill— which would authorise it to declare certain localities “disturbed” to rectify a perceived demographic imbalance, control property sales, and protect tenants — has raised hackles in the state, with the Opposition calling it politically-driven, unconstitutional, and unwarranted.

The Rajasthan Prohibition of Transfer of Immovable Property and Provision for Protection of Tenants from Eviction from the Premises in Disturbed Areas Bill, 2026, is being touted as a move to maintain communal harmony and social structure.

The Bill will give the government unrestricted powers to label neighbourhoods as “disturbed areas” and block property transfers without official permission. Areas can be declared “disturbed” for a period of three years, which can be extended or reduced subject to certain conditions.

Any violation could lead to three to five years in jail, and the offences would be bailable and non-bailable.

Activists and legal experts say the proposed law leans heavily on vague claims of demographic imbalance and mirrors the controversial Gujarat Prohibition of Transfer of Immovable Property and Provision for Protection of Tenants from Eviction from Premises in Disturbed Areas Act, 1991, raising serious fears of targeting, profiling, and state overreach.

The Gujarat law was enacted in 1991 following a series of communal riots, and was originally framed to prevent distress sales — the phenomenon of an individual being forced to sell their property at throwaway prices due to fear of violence or intimidation, usually during communal unrest. Its constitutional validity is currently under challenge before the Gujarat High Court.

Meanwhile, the desert state’s new Bill comes close on the heels of the Rajasthan Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Bill, 2025, which prohibits religious conversion by force or by fraudulent means. Petitioners against it have argued that it infringes on constitutional protections, including the right to equality, life, liberty, and property.

Activists and political observers say that, like the previous Bill, the new Bill could cause deep divisions in the social structure and was politically motivated to deepen religious polarisation in a state known for communal harmony.

Draft Bill’s details

The Bill aims to declare areas affected by violence, mob unrest, or what the government calls “improper clustering” as “disturbed areas”, and property transfers there would be rendered null and void unless approved by a competent authority, such as the district magistrate.

State Law Minister Jogaram Patel, in the current Assembly session, justified the need for the Bill thus: “In many areas of our state, there has been a widespread impact of the increasing population of a particular community. Demographic imbalance, communal tension, and a lack of public harmony have been seen in the community for quite some time.”

According to the government, riots, mob violence, and unrest were deliberate acts in particular areas, and many old inhabitants of such areas were being forced to sell their properties at throwaway prices. Hence, there was a need to regulate such areas and stop their demographic profile change.

Terming the Bill as progressive, the minister said its passage would protect permanent residents’ properties and tenants’ rights in areas declared as “disturbed”.

Reactions

The Congress has strongly opposed the Bill, calling it unconstitutional, politically-driven, and an infringement on the rights to equality and property, arguing that existing criminal laws were sufficient to handle law-and-order concerns.

Challenging the legal basis of the bill, it said terms such as "population or demographic imbalance” were not recognised in law, and that the Bill did not define the criteria to declaring an area “disturbed”.

Former chief minister Ashok Gehlot called the proposed Bill a shameful chapter in Rajasthan’s history. Taking to X, he wrote that the difference between his Congress government and the current regime was stark, as his government established the country’s first Peace and Non-Violence Department, following the principles of Mahatma Gandhi, but this regime not only dismantled the department but was hell-bent on turning Rajasthan into a “communal laboratory”.

He added that the state, long known for its culture of brotherhood, harmony, and spirit of “Padharo Mhare Desh”, was being touted as “disturbed” when no such condition warranted such legislation.

Warning of far-reaching consequences, Gehlot said the proposed law would negatively impact the property values of ordinary citizens and divide communities that have lived together in harmony for centuries. He accused the BJP government of resorting to polarisation to divert attention from its administrative failures.

Reacting to the proposed Bill, political commentator and author Sunny Sebastian said: “There is seemingly no immediate need for it. I cannot understand the immediate need for the Bill, because Rajasthan is a relatively peaceful state and has no history of communal disharmony.”

He added: “It may be on the instructions of the Centre or the work of state leaders to remain or elevate themselves in the good books of the top leaders, coming as it is on the heels of the anti-conversion bill passed in September 2025.”

(The author is a senior Jaipur-based journalist)