Rajasthan's Disturbed Areas Bill Is Necessary, But Not Sufficient To Address Demographic Anxieties

The Rajasthan government is poised to introduce a piece of legislation aimed at curbing distress sales of properties in communally sensitive areas.

Formally titled the Rajasthan Prohibition of Transfer of Immovable Property and Provisions for Protection of Tenants from Eviction from Premises in Disturbed Areas Bill, 2026, this bill was approved by the state Cabinet on 21 January 2026, and is set to be tabled in the Legislative Assembly during the Budget Session starting 28 January 2026.

Reported to be modelled after Gujarat's longstanding Disturbed Areas Act, it empowers the government to declare certain localities as "disturbed" based on factors like violence, riots, or "improper clustering" leading to demographic imbalances. In these zones, property transfers would require prior approval from authorities, rendering unauthorised deals null and void, with penalties including three to five years imprisonment.

Proponents, including the BJP-led administration under Chief Minister Bhajan Lal Sharma, frame this as a safeguard for permanent residents, preventing exploitation amid communal unrest and preserving social harmony. Critics from the opposition Congress and the SDPI (allegedly the political wing of the prohibited PFI) decry it as unconstitutional and divisive.

Yet, beneath the surface, this bill reflects a deeper undercurrent: the growing anxiety among non-Muslim communities about demographic shifts.

Over the past decade and even before that, there are multiple instances from across India of families forced to sell their properties at throwaway prices under immense demographic pressure from the local Muslim community.

This isn't isolated to a region or a period. Gujarat's Disturbed Areas Act provides a precedent and a case in point. Enacted in 1991 and amended over the years, it has been invoked through numerous government notifications, covering thousands of localities across cities like Ahmedabad (770 localities as of 2018), Vadodara, and Surat. No areas have been denotified since its inception, leading to semi-permanent restrictions in communally sensitive pockets.

The Act prohibits property transfers without approval to avert distress sales during riots or demographic changes. However, while effective in stabilising certain areas, it hasn't eradicated the root causes of demographic imbalance. As of January 2026, Rajasthan is on track to become the second state with such a law, but similar measures remain absent elsewhere in India.

Necessary, But Not Sufficient

These legislative efforts stem from a broader demographic anxiety in India's non-Muslim populations, which in most parts of the country is the Hindu community. At the core of this unease lies a stark disparity in Total Fertility Rates (TFR), the average number of children a woman has in her lifetime.

According to the last comprehensive data set released by the National Family Health Survey-5 (NFHS-5, 2019–2021), Hindus have a TFR of 1.94, while Muslims stand at 2.36. This gap, though narrowing from historical highs (3.3 for Hindus and 4.4 for Muslims in the early 1990s), persists and fuels fears of long-term population shifts. This is not to mention the real or imagined fear of Muslim households under-reporting numbers.

Nationally, India's overall TFR has dipped to 2.0, below the replacement level of 2.1, the threshold needed for a population to sustain itself without migration or mortality changes. For Hindus, at 1.94, this spells potential erosion of numerical dominance over generations, especially when contrasted with Muslims' higher rate. As the Muslim population growth rate outpaces others, it inevitably reshapes electoral maps, resource allocation, and cultural identities.

In a possible signal that the Union government recognises this trend, Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, during her Interim Budget speech on 1 February 2024, announced a high-powered committee to examine challenges from "fast population growth and demographic changes". This was hailed as a forward-thinking move, with Prime Minister Narendra Modi later referencing it as emblematic of long-term planning.

However, as of January 2026, no formal notifications, members, or reports have emerged. The committee remains stalled, even as the delayed Census 2027, approved in December 2025, gears up for a digital rollout starting April 2026.

While these commissions and laws signal awareness, they skirt the fundamental issue: fertility differentials. Property restrictions may prevent forced displacements, but they don't alter birth rates. Demographic imbalance isn't just about migration or clustering; it's about who populates the future.

If Hindus continue at sub-replacement fertility, their proportion could shrink, exacerbating anxieties regardless of protective legislation.

The real, meaningful solution lies in boosting Hindu TFR to at least replacement levels: 2.1 or higher.

This isn't a novel idea. RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat has advocated it multiple times, framing it as essential for societal survival.

In August 2025, during an RSS centenary event in New Delhi, he urged couples to have at least three children, noting that fractional births aren't feasible and that communities with TFR below 2.1 "slowly go extinct".

In December 2024, at a Nagpur event, he warned that societies perishing below replacement vanish from history, calling for more than two or three offspring.

Even back in August 2016, at an RSS convention in Agra, he encouraged Hindu couples to produce more children to preserve culture amid fertility concerns.

Bhagwat's calls resonate in RSS contexts emphasising Hindu demographic strength.

Critics may label this regressive, given India's 1.4 billion population and environmental strains. But in a democracy where numbers influence power, ignoring fertility gaps risks marginalisation and eventually, erasure.

Increasing TFR doesn't mean unchecked growth; it means targeted policies like better childcare, education incentives, and cultural shifts to value larger families without coercion. Southern states show convergence is possible through development, but northern disparities demand proactive Hindu community engagement.

The Rajasthan bill and stalled commissions are vital stopgaps, but they do nothing to address the cause of demographic anxiety among India's non-Muslim communities.

By raising TFR thoughtfully, through empowerment, not mandates, India can alleviate demographic anxieties. This isn't about division; it's about keeping India, India.